Skip to main content

Full text of "Treason - The New World Order - Gurudas 1996"

See other formats


Treason 
the New World Order 



by Gurudas 



Cassandra Press 
San Rafael, Ca 



Cassandra Press 

P.O. Box 150868 

San Rafael, CA. 94915 



© 1996 by Gurudas. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced 
in any manner whatsoever without the written permission of Gurudas. 



Printed in the United States of America 



Other books by Gurudas 

Flower Essences and Vibrational Healing 
Gem Elixirs and Vibrational Healing, Vol. I 
Gem Elixirs and Vibrational Healing, Vol II 
The Spiritual Properties of Herbs 



Table of Contents 



Preface. 



Chapter I Introduction 1 

Purpose in Doing This Book, America Today, Weimar Republic, Danger of 
Complacency, Confronting Evil, Corporate Control, Increasingly the New World 
Order is Here, Warnings From Many That Our Rights Are Threatened. 

Chapter II Freedom is Being Lost 5 

Intentions of the Founding Fathers, Republic vs. Democracy, The Constitution 
and Bill of Rights, Dangers of a Moneyed Elite, Views of Gerry Spence, William 
Greider, Lewis Lapham. 

Chapter III The Secret Government 11 

Members and Writings on the Secret Government, Four Factions, Treason and 
Corruption, Controlled Press, Carroll Quigley, Council on Foreign Relations, 
Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergers, Control of U.S. Foreign Policy, Reece 
Committee, Power of Foundations, Barry Goldwater and Buckminstcr Fuller on 
Ruling Elite, Conspiracy View of History. 

Chapter IV New World Order. 25 

New World Order Defined, Hundreds of Books, and Articles Describe the Coming 
Police State, End of U.S. Sovereignty and Constitution, Role of Socialism, 
Quotes By Bertrand Russell, Arnold Toynbee, H.G. Wells, and Paul Ehrlich, 
Population Threat, Family Control, Congress Debates World Government, 
Communist Threat, Catholic Church, Report From Iron Mountain. 

Chapter V Fooling The People .43 

Our Present Paradigm, Creating Crime, Friendly Fascism, Gradualism, Library of 
Congress, Vote Fraud, Executive Orders, Creating Diversions, History is 
Changed, The UN Threat, Federal Reserve, Contract With America, False New 
Deal, Phony Investigations, Phony Excuses to Create A World Government, War 
on Drugs, New Constitution. 

Chapter VI State Rights and the Federal Government. 65 

Sovereign States, Nullification, Intrusions of the Federal Government, Addiction 
to Federal Dollars, Tenth Amendment, Returning Power to the States, Separation 
of Powers, Bureaucracy, Lobbyists, Federalization of Crime, The Ultimate 
Resolution, Sovereignty Resolution, Judicial Tyranny. 

Chapter VII Early Signs of Treason .79 

Corporations Support Communism and Nazis, Corporate Support for Fascism in 
the U.S., Coup d'etat Attempts in the U.S., General Butler Saves the Day, 
Munitions Hearings, GM and the Nazis, Trading with the Nazis During W.W. II, 
Bringing Nazi War Criminals into the U.S. 



Chapter VIII Rise of the Corporate State 97 

Corporate Charters, Rise of the Corporate Culture, Consumerism Replaces 
Citizenship, Lost Rights and the New Deal, Merging of Government and 
Business, Corporations As Citizens, Corporate Welfare, Corporate Crime. 

Chapter IX Rise of the Transnational Corporations 113 

Fusion of Economic and Political power, Growth of Undemocratic International 
Agencies, NAFTA and GATT, Control of Third World Governments, Mexico 
Loan, One World Currency, Controlling Transnational Corporations, Managed 
Trade. 

Chapter X Rise of the National Security State: Cold War and Democracy 123 

Rise of Nationalism, War, Cold War and Lost Rights, War Scare of 1948, Who 
Started the Cold War, NATO, Classified Documents, Weaker FOIA, Warnings 
About Cold War, Secrecy, Military Conversion. 

Chapter XI The CIA and the Intelligence Community 137 

CIA and the Secret Government, Above Top Secret, NRO, Out of Control 
Agency, Black Budget and Government Secrecy, Congressional Oversight 
Committees, Congress is the Enemy, Past Warnings About the CIA, History of 
the CIA, BCCI, S&L Scandal, Richard Ames, Abolish the CIA. 

Chapter XII State and Federal Police 153 

Intimidation of Political Activists, COINTELPRO Continues Against Patriots 
and Environmentalists, Ruby Ridge, Waco, Many Raids, Seizing Guns, ATF, 
L.A. Riots, Corrupt Justice Department, Federal Police, Private Security Industry, 
Controlling the Intelligence Community. 

Chapter XIII Militias in American History 171 

Role of State Militias, View of the Founders, Gradual Federalization of State 
Militias, The Courts Intervene, Right to Bear Arms, Unenrolled Militias Today. 

Chapter XIV Our Hidden Past: History of Martial Law In the U.S 177 

Nature of Martial Law, History of Martial Law in the U.S., Martial Law During 
the Civil War, Habeas Corpus, Martial Law From Civil War Still in Effect, 
Emergency Powers, U.S. Flag. 

Chapter XV Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 183 

False Emergency, Secret Plans For Martial Law, FEMA, Unconstitutional Laws, 
RX 84, 1994 Survey Asks Marines About Killing Americans, Garden Plot, Iran- 
Contra, Michael New, Foreign Troops in U.S., Growing Power of U.N., Military 
Exercises, Current Surveillance of Americans, Street Gangs, Prison Camps. 

Chapter XVI The Oklahoma Bombing 201 

Government Cover-up, Motives For Bombing, World Trade Center, Terrorism On 
Demand, John Doe 2, McVeigh's Money, Bombs Inside Building, Seismographic 
Evidence, Rush to Destroy Evidence, Illegally Stored Munitions, Advanced 
Warnings of Bombing, Witnesses Threatened by FBI, Fired Grand Juror, Missing 
ATF Agents, Suppressed Surveillance Videos, Foreign Operatives. 



Chapter XVII Recent Attacks on the Militias and Patriot Movement. 217 

Evidence Militias and Patriots Are Not Racist or Anti-Semitic, Phony Critics of 
the Right, White Supremacist and Neo-Nazis, Media Propaganda, FBI Infiltrates 
Militias, Left and Right Working Together, Liberal Paradox, Polls Supporting 
Militias, Progressives Attack GATT/NAFTA, Populisms vs. Conservatives. 
Focus on Large Corporations, Political Debate Not Allowed. 

Chapter XVIII Murder as a Political Weapon in America 231 

Arranged Suicides and Accidents, Death of the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, 
Malcolm X, Walter Reuther, Vince Foster, and Karen Silkwood, Many Deaths 
Around Clinton, Daniel Casolaro and Inslaw, Killing the Musicians, Threatened 
Into Silence, Deaths in the FBI, CIA, and the Military, Murder by Cancer and 
Heart Attack. 

Chapter XIX Radiation, Biological, and Chemical Experiments on People 243 

The People As Guinea Pigs, Exposure to Atomic Tests, Increased Cancer, 
Difficulty Receiving Treatment, Nuclear Weapons Industry Cover-Up, Mustard 
Gas Experiments, Aspartame, BGH, Floridation, Food Irradiation, Genetics, Gulf 
War Syndrome, Malathion, MTBE, Mustard Gas, Sewage Sludge in Our Food. 

Chapter XX Restoring Constitutional Government 257 

Awakening the People, Education to Stop Treason, What Will the People Do, 
Responsibility of the People, Current Dangerous Situation, Patriotic Military, 
Predictions of Coming Dictatorship, Third Political Parties, Future Actions, It's 
the Constitution, Spiritual Politics, George Washington's Vision. 

Notes 269 

Bibliography 301 

Index 309 



Acknowledgments 



I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all the people who contributed to 
the writing of this book. 



Preface 



I originally was drawn to write this book because of my years of involvement 
in alternative health. In the 1980s I founded and later sold Pegasus Products, Inc. a 
firm that produces and distributes flower essences, gem elixirs, and homeopathic 
remedies. I was also a health practitioner for some years and have written four 
books on alternative health. FDA abuses have become the norm, and gradually I 
came to understand how dangerous the federal government has become to our 
freedoms. 

My purpose in writing this book is to awaken more people to the fact that 
these are very dangerous times for America. More and more of the rights we take 
for granted are being lost. Too many politicians have sold out to the special 
interests, and most people are too busy watching TV to notice or take 
responsibility for what is happening. In the name of stopping illegal drugs and 
crime our rights are gradually being forfeited, as the federal government tightens 
control over the people. 

I have also written this book so that people can more easily look at the whole 
picture. I have focused my research on extracting information from hundreds of 
books, newspapers, and magazines so that people can more easily understand what 
is taking place in America. Some might say that several stories of government 
abuse that are heard in one part of the country don't appear too threatening. Yet 
when you look at many different incidents all across the country and grasp the full 
picture it is clear that something is very wrong. 



Chapter I 
Introduction 



"In our country the lie has become not just a moral category, but a pillar of the 
state." 

Alexander Solzhenitsyn 

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and 
slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God — I know not what course others may take; but 
as for me, give me liberty or give me death?" 

Patrick Henry 



America today exists in a twilight zone, not a democracy or a Republic but 
not yet a police state. America has become an elitist corporate oligarchy. We as a 
people clearly do not have the freedoms that the Founding Fathers had and that 
they envisioned for future generations. The many cases of government abuse 
described in this book are no longer rare or unique, they are increasingly the norm. 
Especially since the late 1960s, numerous American political activists have been 
murdered, maimed, framed, kidnapped, bombed, and spied on by government 
agents. We now have camouflaged police that look like terrorists, undercover 
police in the schools, curfews, roadblocks, urine tests, and informer networks. 
Government terrorism against the people continues to grow. 

While I discuss the secret, or invisible government, that controls America, I 
also show how society is changing as the new world order dictatorship gradually 
takes hold. The cultural, economic, social, and political trends that are creating the 
new world order are discussed in detail. Over many years the large corporations 
have taken control of our society, and we are all worse off because of this. In the 
1930s the banking/corporate elite attempted to establish a dictatorship while their 
agent Roosevelt was in power. Now, with an out-of-control intelligence commu- 
nity, the situation is more dangerous. Presidential edicts establish secret laws, 
while Congress has little say as federal power grows. The dictatorship of the new 
world order would be much worse than Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, 
because the technology to control people is much more advanced today. The U.S. 
News & World Report was quite accurate to present an article on North Korea with 
a caption under a photo entitled new world order.' That type of extreme control is 
what awaits America. 

Historians have shown that one reason Hitler took control in Germany was 
because people were too busy with their own personal and professional lives to get 
involved in politics. Many felt that if Hitler took power he would become a good 
German because his advisors would control him. By the time people awoke, it was 
too late. A former Berlin businessman "blamed his own group, people with the 
time and money and the opportunity to know better, for what happened to 



2 Treason The New World Order 



Germany. We ignored Hitler. We considered him an unimportant fellow... .We 
considered itjust a bit vulgar to bother with him, to bother with politics at all."* 

In certain respects America today is like Germany in the 1930s. In the later 
days of the Weimar government, key leaders were assassinated just as in America. 
George McGovern said, as in the Weimar period many people today are angry and 
distrust the government." As happened in Germany we have turned away from our 
Constitution. Hitler introduced gun control just as is happening today. Our 1968 
gun control law is taken almost word for word from the 1938 German gun control 
law. As in Germany there are people in America today trying to warn the public 
that we face a disastrous turn away from our heritage if the people don't wake up. 
Germany had a developed culture, so the people did not believe the warnings. In 
America we have a democratic heritage and people are uneducated as to what is 
happening to our society partly because of a corporate-controlled press. Most 
people quietly go about their professional and personal lives not understanding that 
our way of life is gravely threatened by the coming new world order. 

Many readers will read this material and think it foolish to say a dictatorship 
is coming. Unfortunately, that cavalier attitude is one reason why a Republic can 
be lost. Daniel Webster said: "God grants liberty only to those who love it, and 
are always ready to guard and defend it." If every one sits back complacently who 
will protect the Republic? Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for the 
triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Many issues discussed in this book 
are ignored by the national press. People need to get more involved and study what 
is really happening in America. Newsweek published a letter from someone after 
the congressional Ruby Ridge hearings who said: "It concerns me that people I had 
believed to be paranoid extremists and lunatics may actually have a point.'" 

When decent people are confronted by evil, it can be difficult for them to 
accept it. This is one reason why people find it difficult to accept conspiracies. A 
few years ago the Texas Attorney General visited the place where people had been 
sacrificed in satanic rituals. On national television, this official said he wouldn't 
believe it except that he had seen it. In World War II after the Soviet army captured 
Treblinka, one of the first major death camps to be overrun, Western reporters 
were brought in. They reported the gas chambers and mass killings to the West, 
but it wasn't initially believed. It was considered to be anti-Nazi propaganda 
because supposedly even the Nazis couldn't kill people like cattle. Indeed, normal 
people have a right to ask why should people so thirst for money and power. It 
can be a sickness that decent people cannot understand. 

Some people who hear this information laugh or get very upset because it 
disturbs their perception of reality. If you only get news from the national media, 
this book will be quite shocking. The truth is so scary that many people don't 
want to confront it. Patrick Henry said: "It is natural for man to indulge in the 
illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth. ...For my 
part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole 
truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." 

In recent years millions of Americans have learned that special interest groups 
now control the political process and own this country. Various banking groups 
and business leaders, along with rogue elements in the military and intelligence 
communities behind the scenes, are the dominant special interest group in Amer- 
ica. Many politicians are controlled by these people, sometimes without politi- 
cians even realizing it. With great power, unlimited funds, occasional threats, and 



Introduction 3 



numerous contacts, this elite force secretly controls many special interest groups 
which actually serve as front organizations. Second, just as many politicians have 
sold out to special interest groups, there is today in America a systematic avoid- 
ance, distortion, and suppression of news in the national media, which today is 
controlled by a handful of bankers and corporations allied to this corporate elite. 
While I often refer to corporations in this book, behind the large corporations are 
large banks. David M. Kotz said banks generally control the large U.S. corpora- 
tions by exerting outside pressure, placing their representatives on the board of 
directors, or through stock ownership/ 

One doesn't have to believe in the power of the banking groups to understand 
that a dictatorship is coming. The bankers and corporate elite in hundreds of 
books, articles, and speeches openly write of their plans to disarm the U.S. mili- 
tary and end our sovereignty, while creating a one world government led by the 
UN with a powerful new army. Much of this literature is discussed in this book. 
Consider the actions of the UN, various U.S. government agencies, current laws, 
and how they are being enforced against the people. Numerous presidential edicts 
often nullify the Constitution. 

One of the scary things about this book is that much of the material contained 
here was obtained from reading various newspapers and magazines or by just 
watching television. Many of the things discussed in this book accurately portray 
in frightening detail a growing trend towards the future society depicted in Brave 
New World by Huxley and 1984 by Orwell. In December, 1978 in The Futurist, 
David Goodman listed 137 predictions made by George Orwell. Over 100 of them 
had already come true. Goodman said: "The possibility of Orwell's 1984 becoming 
reality. ..is clear. ...Though 1984 has failed as a warning, it has been succeeding 
brilliantly as a forecast." In recent years, especially in doing the research for this 
book, I have noticed over and over again people asking "How could this happen in 
America?" It will keep on happening, unless we the people take back the govern- 
ment. 

In recent years the press has released much shocking information. If I had 
written a book years ago just listing the many exposes released in shows like 60 
Minutes on how the government has abused its citizens, few people would have 
believed such things could happen in America! If I had written several years ago 
that thousands of Americans had been secretly exposed to radiation, including even 
plutonium, without their knowledge or consent and that some of these people were 
pregnant, who would have believed this. When this was reported in late 1993, 
some said this only occurred in dictatorships like the former Soviet Union. It is 
time to understand that, in many respects, we are already living in a dictatorship. It 
is just very sophisticated. As Rousseau said: "There is no subjugation so perfect 
as that which keeps the appearance of freedom, for in that way one captures 
volition itself." When you control what people think, without people even realiz- 
ing this is being done, it is possible to control and transform a society without 
using force. We are all blinded by propaganda. 

Over 400,000 people have had their assets forfeited, the majority without even 
being accused of a crime. Many lose their properly after they are found innocent of 
a crime. Your assets are guilty until proven innocent. No free society would allow 
such laws. Prosecutors openly harass criminal attorneys, and there is increasingly 
harsh anti-crime legislation with an attempt to remove guns from the people in 
the phony war on drugs. Law enforcement agencies act with increased aggressive- 



4 Treason The New World Order 



ness against all citizens.' The traditional rights of a juror have been greatly 
weakened, while surveillance cameras are becoming common. Millions of 
Americans were exposed to open air nuclear tests which the government said were 
quite safe knowing this was a lie. America today has one of the largest prison 
populations in the world, and all signs indicate that population will greatly expand 
in the next few years, with many new prisons now being built. 

The contents of this book may be new to many. However, Americans in- 
creasingly understand the vast treason and corruption now taking place. It is just 
that the national media will rarely discuss these issues, or they are discussed in a 
very biased manner, so many readers will not appreciate how widespread is the 
discussion and understanding of these problems. What if the information in this 
book is true? What if only part of it is true? Isn't it time to stop blindly believing 
the propaganda we are fed in the national media, ignoring politics or just pressing 
the lever at the polling station concluding that you have fulfilled your responsib- 
ility as a citizen. The present dangerous state of affairs has taken place partly 
because we as citizens have shirked our responsibilities. We must all get involved 
in the political process if we are to reverse the overwhelming power of the federal 
government and Wall Street. 

Last year I listened to a conservative radio announcer attack the conspiracy 
views of the Christie Institute and The Secret Government by Bill Moyer. What 
the announcer didn't add is that many on the right also strongly attack the national 
security apparatus and the hidden power of the banking groups. Pat Robertson in 
the New World Order is not the only conservative attacking these forces. When Pat 
Robertson and Bill Moyers can agree that our nation is today threatened by certain 
internal forces, this is one more sign that people should take a closer look at what 
is happening today. Over the months I read and found relevant information in 
conservative publications, such as The American Spectator and the National 
Review, and in progressive publications, such as Z Magazine and In These Times. 
This book is not meant to be liberal or conservative; it is meant to support 
restoring constitutional government. 

Across the political spectrum there are voices trying to warn the people that 
the country is gravely threatened. Some, like Gore Vidal, Stewart Udall, and Bill 
Moyers, talk about the nefarious activities of the national security state. Noam 
Chomsky describes the one world government in various books and articles. 
Others, like Buckminister Fuller in Critical Path, present a broad history of how 
the invisible corporate government has long controlled and manipulated the 
people. People like William Domhoff and C. Wright Mills describe the elite that 
have long ruled America from behind the scenes. Barry Goldwater and Pat 
Robertson describe the dangerous activities of certain bank controlled groups. 
Christopher Lasch and Gerry Spence feel our constitutional form of government 
has been seriously weakened by the corporate elite. 

All these people say there are powerful groups threatening our way of life. 
Some sources identify the bankers and corporate elite as the source of our 
problems, while others feel the national security state is the threat. The power of 
Wall Street is now obvious to many. So much is happening today that it is 
increasingly clear a police state is no longer some distant event to fear. The 
American people must awaken and join together to restore constitutional govern- 
ment and diminish the power of the large corporations and their agent, the federal 
government, so that we can again be a free people. 



Chapter II 
Freedom Is Being Lost 



"The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with 
power to endanger the public liberty." 

John Adams 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they 
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights... .When a long train 
of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to 
reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw 
off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." 

Declaration of Independence 



Right from the founding of the Republic, the people have been controlled and 
ruled by an elite group of wealthy people. As students of the Constitution are well 
aware, the constitutional convention was conducted by men of means, determined 
to protect themselves and their class from the people. This is why the Senate and 
president were elected by separate representatives to protect society from dangerous 
democratic impulses. Alexander Hamilton said: "It is admitted that you cannot 
have a good executive upon a democratic plan. ...The people, sir, are a great beast." 
John Quincy Adams said: the framers of the Constitution did not profess to be 
"slavish adorers of our sovereign lords the people." Most who attended the consti- 
tutional convention feared and distrusted the political involvement of the people. 
Some, like Benjamin Franklin, initially disliked the Constitution believing it 
cheated the people. 

While the constitutional convention was held because of dissatisfaction with 
the Articles of Confederation, the greater inspiration was the growing Shays Re- 
bellion. Farmers and townspeople were revolting against the increased tax burden 
and political repression by the ruling elite. "It is clear that Shays rebellion played 
an integral part of the genesis and formation of the U.S. Constitution.'" James 
Madison said this rebellion "contributed more to that uneasiness which produced 
the Convention. ..than those. ..from the inadequacy of the Confederation." Dele- 
gates at the convention wanted a strong central government to weaken the local 
power of the common people and to promote commerce. John Jay, the first Chief 
Justice of the Supreme Court, said: "The people who own the country ought to 
govern it." The intention was to establish the rule of law, not the rule of the 
common people. 5 

The Constitution established America as a Republic, not a democracy. James 
Madison said: "The two great points of difference between a democracy and a 
Republic are the delegation of the government in the latter, to a small number of 
citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens and greater 



6 Treason The New World Order 



sphere of country over which the latter may be extended." In 1828 Noah Webster's 
Dictionary defined a Republic as "A commonwealth: a state in which the exercise 
of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In 
modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state in which the people 
exercise the powers of sovereignty in person." 

In a Republic the rights of all citizens are protected; in a democracy there is a 
danger of tyranny from the majority. A Republic exists under the rule of law, 
while a democracy is threatened by tyranny from the majority. Tocqueville said: 
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist 
until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public 
treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate 
promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a 
democracy collapses over loose fiscal policy. ..always followed by a dictatorship." 
We have a limited democracy, in that the people are today allowed to directly elect 
members of Congress and to serve as jurors and on a grand jury. However, those 
who today think we are a democracy, not a Republic, should remember that the 
"Pledge of Allegiance" is to the Republic, not to the democracy. The word democ- 
racy isn't even in the Constitution. 

Last year I heard a radio speech by a president from the early 1920s. He called 
America a Republic; this was the first time I had heard a politician use this word 
to describe America. Today, as the people's rights are being replaced by false ex- 
ternal trappings, we are constantly assured that America is a democracy. Before the 
New Deal, America was rarely referred to as a democracy. The Constitution, in 
Article IV, Section 4, says: "The U.S. shall guarantee in every State in this Union 
a Republican form of government...." 

Many people were aware that the new Constitution was prepared by the ruling 
elite. This is partly why many felt the constitutional convention had gone too far. 
In Rhode Island, where small farmers controlled state politics, the proposed Con- 
stitution was passed out to the people and, unlike in other states, they were 
allowed to directly vote on it. The result was 237 for and 2,708 against the 
Constitution. Two states rejected the Constitution, and intense pressure including 
secrecy and deceit were used to ratify it. Delegates to the Pennsylvania legislature 
were dragged to the assembly by a mob and forced to vote. In most states the 
Constitution was approved because the state legislatures were from the ruling 
class. The Federalist Papers were written to ease the concerns of many, and some 
states ratified the Constitution with the understanding that a Bill of Rights would 
be added. 

The Bill of Rights was not originally in the Constitution, partly because the 
delegates were not overly interested in protecting the people's right, and the federal 
government was to have very limited powers, so many felt it wasn't needed. 
Pennsylvania delegate James Wilson said there was no need for a federal Bill of 
Rights because the new federal government would only have the powers expressly 
delegated to it. Many felt that state sovereignty and each state's Bill of Rights 
would be sufficient to protect the people, because governing would mainly be done 
by state and local authorities. 

The difference between people today and those in the Revolutionary War is 
that then the average person understood they were trading rule by England for rule 
by the moneyed interests. And the people weren't always willing to accept this 
new rule. This is partly why the Shays and Whisky rebellions took place. Taxes 



Freedom is Being Lost 7 



were only part of the problem, despite what historians claim. In contrast, today 
there is a myth that America is a democracy and there is no ruling elite, and until 
recently people have not been willing to defend their rights. In the 1930s the 
oppressive actions of the federal government would have caused riots in most 
cities if the people had been as determined as our forefathers to defend their rights. 

The myth that America is a real democracy has existed for many years, partly 
because the people have enjoyed certain rights lacking in most nations. At the turn 
of the last century, Brooks Adams said the choice of the ruling class was to coerce 
or bribe the majority. Now the federal government is owned by the large corpora- 
tions, and our rights are increasingly vanishing. Adam Smith in the Wealth of 
Nations warned that throughout history there are always forces attempting to 
control the people to gain increased wealth and power. Smith said governments 
must act to control these forces or there would be dreadful consequences. Smith 
identified the "merchants and manufacturers" as the "principle architects" of gov- 
ernment policies that brought great harm to the English people. Max Weber 
warned: "The question is how are freedom and democracy in the long run possible 
at all under the domination of highly developed capitalism? Freedom and democ- 
racy are only possible where the resolute will of a nation not to allow itself to be 
ruled like sheep is permanently alive." 

That so few people today participate in the political process is cause for great 
concern. Not only is there a vacuum in political leadership, but that void is being 
filled by a corporate elite with the ready approval of a controlled press. James Q. 
Wilson, past president of the American Political Science Association, said: 
"Elections have become less important, because the real policy-making is now 
done by courts, bureaucracies and legislatures operated by an ambitious political 
class with very little orientation towards public preferences." These people repre- 
sent their own interests, not that of the people." The very legitimacy of govern- 
ment is now at stake with so few people voting. People understand that they are 
no longer part of the decision-making process. 

In the 20th century many people have discussed the ruling elite. Gaetano 
Mosca said: "All political regimes are of necessity ruled by. ..an organized 
minority controlling a disorganized majority. ...The first class, always the less 
numerous, performs all political functions, monopolizes power and enjoys the 
advantages that power brings, whereas the second, the more numerous class, is 
directed and controlled by the first, in a manner that is now more or less legal, 
now more or less arbitrary and violent." Noam Chomsky said in America "the 
specialized class are offered the opportunity to manage public affairs by virtue of 
their subordination to those with real power in our societies, dominant business 
interests. ...These ideas. ..have an unmistakable resemblance to the Leninist concept 
of a vanguard party that leads the masses to a bettter life that they cannot conceive 
or construct on their own...." Lippmann's specialized class and Lenin's vanguard of 
revolutionary intellectuals will lead the way to a better society, however many 
must be sacrificed along the way. 4 

Supposedly there must be the manufacture of consent because the elite cannot 
trust public opinion because only certain capable people can manage society. 
Harold Lasswell said when elites cannot use force to compel obedience, social 
managers must turn to "a whole new technique of control, largely through propa- 
ganda." We must acknowledge "the ignorance and stupidity (of). ..the masses" and 



8 Treason The New World Order 



not succumb to "democratic dogmatism about men being the best judges of their 
own interests." 

These doctrines "and others are entirely natural in any society in which power 
is narrowly concentrated but formal mechanisms exist by which ordinary people 
may, in theory, play some role in shaping their own affairs — a threat that plainly 
must be barred." America does have more freedom for the people than in other 
western societies "so the ignorant and stupid masses are more dangerous.. ..As the 
state loses the capacity to control the population by force, privileged sectors must 
find other methods to ensure that the rascal multitude is removed from the public 
arena." The people "can be permitted, even encouraged, to ratify the decisions of 
their betters in periodic elections.'" 

Gerry Spence, one of America's most respected criminal lawyers, said: "In this 
country we embrace the myth that we are still a democracy when we know that we 
are not a democracy, that we are not free, that the government does not serve us 
but subjugates us. Although we give lip service to the notion of freedom, we 
know the government is no longer the servant of the people but, at last, has 
become the people's master. ..for the ultimate enemy of any people is not the 
angry hate groups that fester within, but a government itself that has lost its 
respect for the individual. The ultimate enemy of democracy is not the drug dealer 
or the crooked politician or the crazed skinhead. The ultimate enemy is the New 
King that has become so powerful it can murder its own citizens with impunity."* 

"A new tyranny has cast its cold and ugly shadow over the nation, a nation 
where the rights of the people, criminals, and citizens alike exist mostly in myth, 
where the police have become the handmaidens of power, where trials have become 
mere window dressing and mockeries of justice, and where the corporations are left 
free to pillage and ravage the people with utter impunity. ...Entrapped in our 
concrete reservations, indentured to our corporate masters, impoverished of our 
land, separated from the earth, and at last placed at odds with nature herself, many 
no longer see the issue of freedom as relevant.'" 

"It is a tyranny supported by the people. ..,one that enslaves the people while 
it convinces the people they are free. ...We have delivered our power to our oppres- 
sors in exchange for their promise that we will be safe. ...We have accepted the 
myths of freedom as fact in the place of freedom itself. We love our servitude. But 
why not? It often feels as good as freedom and we can enjoy it without the risk 
that always accompanies the struggle for freedom."" Too many Americans are 
willing to give up their freedom to feel safe. We speak about our rights as long as 
we don't have to sacrifice for them. We are free as long as we don't too vehemently 
express our beliefs. Then we may be labeled a political activist, terrorist, or racist 
and paranoid extremist and may be harassed by the police. 

William Greider said: "The decayed condition of American democracy is 
difficult to grasp. ...Symptoms of distress are accumulating freely in the political 
system and citizens are demoralized by the lack of coherent remedies. ...The things 
that Americans were taught and still wish to believe about self-government — the 
articles of civic faith we loosely call democracy — no longer seem to fit the present 
reality. ..American democracy is in much deeper trouble than most people wish to 
acknowledge. Citizens are cut out of politics surrounding the most important 
governing questions. The representative system has undergone a grotesque distor- 
tion of its original purpose." Instead of a real democracy, we get false promises 
and many new laws. The corporations control both political parties, and the people 



Freedom is Being Lost 9 



have become powerless in the political process. The elite decision makers are too 
cut off from the people to really understand or represent the people. "The mutual 
understanding between citizens and government necessary for genuine democracy is 
now deformed or neglected.... A genuine democracy will not likely develop until 
the two realms are reconciled — the irregular citizens and the formal structure of 
power. ...Modern representation has assumed a different purpose — taking care of 
clients, not the larger public interest." 9 

According to Ferdinand Lundberg, "The general public in most instances is 
completely helpless because it is disorganized and very much at odds within 
itself — lacking knowledge, single-minded leadership and staying power. The 
national public must at all times also deal with many local and personal problems. 
It is, therefore, always easily defeated by determined entrenched interests.'"" 

Lewis Lapham said: "In the name of making the world safe for democracy, the 
United States revised its own democratic traditions and constitutional principles. 
By presidential fiat and Defense Department decree, the newly appointed guarantors 
of the world's peace suppressed the turbulent and newly un-American habits of free 
speech. ...The government learned to define freedom as freedom for the state, not 
for the citizens. The national interest became the parochial interest of the ruling 
class, not the multifarious interests of the individuals subsumed under the rubric of 
'the American people.' The question was one of how a government by the 
judicious few could best control and improve the instincts of the foolish many.'" 1 

"The Constitution was made for the uses of the individual. ..and the institu- 
tions of American government were meant to support the liberties of the people, 
not the ambitions of the state. It was the law that had to give way to the citizen's 
freedom of thought and action, not the citizen's freedom of thought and action that 
had to give way to the law." Today, "the government reserves to itself unenumer- 
ated powers and seeks to limit the freedoms of the individual to a list of enumer- 
ated rights. The increasingly punitive uses and interpretations of the law support 
the ambitions of the state, not the liberties of the people." 11 Gore Vidal said: 
"Political decadence occurs when the forms that a state pretends to observe are 
known to be empty of all meaning. Who does not publicly worship the Constitu- 
tion? Who, in practice, observes it at all? Congress has only two great powers 
under the Constitution: the power to declare war and the power of the purse."" 
Both have been largely lost to the national security state and the corporations. 

As Charles Beard demonstrated in Economic Basis of Politics, our Constitu- 
tion is firmly based on private economic interests. The Framers saw their task as 
preserving liberty, but they also wanted to protect property rights as basic to 
liberty. Widespread ownership of land gave people an economic stake in their 
freedom and in the system. The Founders were concerned with property rights and 
abstract rights because they wanted to protect "the real rights of real people." The 
Founders felt that along with a separation of powers in society, if a Republic was 
based on commerce and industry, it would be easier to prevent a tyranny of the 
majority. And it would be easier to achieve material gain in such a Republic, so 
the people would be more satisfied. '* 

However, increased use of maritime or commercial law has encroached upon 
constitutional and common law. Corporations attained rights but not the 
responsibilities of citizens. Corporate welfare became more important than citi- 
zen's rights. The corporate elite appointed their representatives, the lawyers and 
judges, to flood the country with thousands of complex laws, often too long for 



10 Treason The New World Order 



even Congress to read or understand. Gradually, judges enforced these laws and 
forgot about the Constitution and common law. Today government is controlled 
by the large corporations, and federal tyranny is growing. When our Republic was 
founded, wealth was tied to assets like property, and even the wealthy were gener- 
ally cash poor. Everyone benefited from a good infrastructure. Today wealth is 
more purely monetary and can easily be moved between nations. Wealth is no 
longer tied to what also benefits the people. This is partly why the ruling elite has 
turned against the people. 

Perhaps the greatest blessing of the Declaration of Independence, Constitu- 
tion, and Bill of Rights is the recognition that people have natural rights that 
come from God; they are not delegated by the government. William Blackstone 
said: "This law of nature being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself 
is, of course, superior in obligation to any other. ...No human laws are of any 
validity if contrary to this...." Thus the power of a government must be limited, 
which was a fundamental principle of the Founders. The state was to respect and 
not interfere with the free exercise of natural rights. 

In more recent years certain natural rights, like the right to property, are 
ending as the asset forfeiture laws seize people's assets, often when people aren't 
even charged with a crime. In addition, the state now grants the people many 
rights such as in the welfare state. Instead of being a passive observer that did not 
grant or even interfere with people's rights, the government has created and granted 
rights such as providing food and housing. For millions addicted to government 
support, all needs are provided by the state, which greatly increased government 
power because the state needed many new laws and regulations to fulfill its new 
obligations to the people. If the government has the power to grant rights, it will 
inevitably limit those rights and commit crimes against the people as we see 
today. What a government grants, it can take away. Citizens have the legal and 
moral right to resist unjust laws. This is why the right to jury nullification was 
widely accepted for over 100 years before the founding of the Republic. People 
have a right and duty when on a jury to reject unjust laws. 

While it may be possible to improve the Constitution, I do not attack it, 
especially since the Bill of Rights was added. I agree with the Founders, like 
Benjamin Franklin, who felt that by establishing a Republic with a Bill of Rights 
they were also protecting the people's rights. The problem is not the Constitution, 
it is the nature of the human condition. Thucydides said: "Of the Gods we believe, 
and of men we know, that by a necessary law of their nature they rule wherever 
they can." Most communist nations had a Constitution with clauses protecting 
human rights. Such words had little value. Our Constitution will only work if the 
people actively strive to protect their rights and if the rule of law prevails. If the 
large corporations aren't soon stopped, our Republic will one day become a distant 
memory. Already most Americans think we are a democracy when, in fact, we are 
a Republic. The Republic should be reestablished with democratically-orientated 
institutions. 



11 



Chapter III 
The Secret Government 



"I sincerely believe. ..that banking establishments are more dangerous than 
standing armies." 

Thomas Jefferson 

"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own 
soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" 

Matthew 16:26 



Many books written by political and social scientists describe the corporate 
elite. While many consider America a pluralist society, too many well-researched 
books, such as Who Rules America Now? by G. William Domhoff and The 
Power Elite by C. Wright Mills, have shown that there is a cohesive upper class 
ruling America, a power elite consisting especially of corporate executives which 
dominates public policy, the electorial process, and government through numerous 
organizations and the expertise of foundations and think-tanks. These political 
scientists do not speak of conspiracies; yet what they write is often similar to 
what many on the right and left say about the corporate elite that controls Amer- 
ica. Domhoff and many others have presented considerable evidence about the 
power and influence of the Trilateral Commission (TC) and Council on Foreign 
Relations (CFR) over our lives. 

FDR My Exploited Father -In-Law, by C.B. Dall is a very important book 
because it provides an inside look at how certain people have controlled our 
political destiny throughout the 20th century. Dall describes how the corporate 
elite ruthlessly advance their objectives at the people's expense, grooming phony 
politicians, creating wars and then phony peace treaties to mislead the public. Dall 
said CFR control of our political destiny had created a "subtle dictatorship by the 
few." Dall called people like Colonel House, a key aide to President Wilson, 
"early one-worlders." Bernard Baruch guided Wilson, "leading him like one would a 
poodle on a string." Before Wilson could become a presidential candidate he had to 
support establishing the Federal Reserve, the direct election of senators, introduce 
the income tax, follow orders if a war started in Europe, and follow recommenda- 
tions for cabinet posts. Dall called Baruch the number one political operative 
behind FDR. For some time Dall was confused by FDR's policies, but he came to 
understand that "Most of his (FDR's) thoughts, his political 'ammunition,' as it 
were, was carefully manufactured for him in advance by the CFR-One-World 
Money group." Gradually, Dall became rather dismayed at these events, because 
FDR supported the one worlders and the "UN hoax.'" As R. Buckminister Fuller 
has also noted, the push for world government is a poison that has quietly existed 
among the ruling elite throughout the 20th century. 



12 Treason The New World Order 



FDR's son Elliott Roosevelt wrote The Conservators in which he declared: 
"There are within our world perhaps only a dozen organizations which shape the 
courses of our various destinies as rigidly as they regularly constituted govern- 
ments. ...The impact of their decisions reach. ..into every home and office building 
in the modern world." These groups are "the creme de la creme of global planners." 
Roosevelt proceeded to describe the elite groups discussed in this book.' On 
August 23, 1993 Christopher Hitchens, the writer and Oxford friend of Clintons, 
on C-Span said: "It is, of course, the case that there is a ruling class in this 
country, and that it has allies internationally." On August 28, 1994 Cokie Roberts 
said on ABC's This Week With David Brinkley that "Global bankers are really 
running the world." 

Just as we now have one national political party with two branches, we have 
a secret government divided into four factions. The ruling faction includes the 
superrich, corporate and bank leaders, foundation heads, European aristocracy, and 
certain managers. The managers are often brilliant and ambitious people with few 
morals. These people generally belong to the TC, CFR, and the Bilderbergers. The 
secret government primarily includes the elites of Europe and America, although 
in recent years elites, from other regions have joined the corporate front groups 
discussed below. George Seldes said: "If it is true that money prevails in national 
and state elections, then it must also be true that the men who put up the money, 
the handful including the Du Ponts, Pews, Mellons, Rockefellers and others. ..also 
control our political life, our Congress, and the Presidency itself. A conspiracy of 
silence has always existed on this subject.'" In the July 26, 1936 New York 
Times Joseph Kennedy, father of the future president, said: "Fifty men have run 
America, and that's a high figure." The second faction includes those in the 
national security state. The bankers and corporate elite are slightly more captivated 
by money, while the rogue military/intelligence groups are more drawn to power. 
The bankers and large corporations comprise the dominant force in control of the 
secret government. All CIA heads have been CFR members. 

These factions form an extremely powerful special interest group determined 
to destroy the Constitution and establishing a one world government. People in 
this group created World Wars I and II and many other conflicts in this century. 
Human life has no meaning to these people. Remember, only a few people around 
Hitler really understood his plans; yet consider the destruction that resulted. From 
this group come the dedicated fanatics determined to kill however many people it 
takes to establish the planned world dictatorship. It is difficult to put into words 
just how ruthless these people are. There are probably no more than several hun- 
dred people actually directing events. These people are supported by dedicated op- 
eratives including hit squads and people in the local, state, and federal police who 
carry out orders. Many of these operatives understand that a police state is planned, 
but they do not understand the ramifications and details. 

The execution of President Kennedy shows the determination of these fanatics. 
Fletcher Prouty, former officer in the Defense Intelligence Agency and author of 
The Secret Team, said the assassination of JFK was the work of the "Secret 
Team," an elite group that operates behind the scenes inside and outside the gov- 
ernment. While in the service, Prouty served as liaison officer between the 
Pentagon and the CIA. He said since World War II "more and more control over 
military and diplomatic operations at home and abroad" was assumed by elites 



The Secret Government 13 



"whose activities are secret, whose budget is secret, whose very identities as often 
as not are secret...." He also said this group has always controlled the CIA. 

In High Treason, members of the "Secret Team," or "The Club," were 
identified as some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in America. "The 
Secret Team runs the U.S., and to a large extent, they have circumvented the 
Constitution. They are highly suspicious of the democratic process, and they have 
consistently tried to control and manipulate elections." These people felt that 
Kennedy threatened their power. "The Secret Team did things to each President to 
make him understand that the power did not lie with the Presidency. His mandate 
may come from the people, but the power — and policy making — came from 
outside, from this shadow government. ...John Kennedy's murder was an example 
to all who followed, telling them to toe the line, and to do as they were 
told. ...Flag waving, super-patriotism, defense and 'national security' was the cover 
for these men to enrich themselves and entrench themselves in power. This Club, 
a loosely knit, informal organization, has gradually established a shadow 
government with a secret, institutionalized covert action capability outside the 
official government." 4 

The third faction of the secret government are the Utopian dreamers or idealists 
who use slogans like "world peace through world law." Here are the scholars and 
think-tank experts and many members of the World Federalist Association (WFA). 
I once heard two such people being interviewed. They were smug in their belief 
that the nation state must end. Some of these people understand that many will die 
to create a world government, but they accept this as a necessary transition stage. 
Some in this faction have deluded themselves into believing that this new society 
will help the people. This may be from a sense of superiority that they, as the 
elite, know what is best for the people or from a belief that one world government 
will prevent war, promote peace, protect the environment, and raise the people's 
standard of living. History has shown that there are always some Utopian dreamers 
who delude themselves into presenting a grandiose totalitarian scheme such as 
communism to improve or save humanity. Behind these dreamers always lurk 
those determined to enhance their power and wealth however many people must be 
killed along the way. 

The fourth faction of the secret government includes opportunists who don't 
really care what a new world order means, but they believe that joining groups like 
the CFR provides career advancement, prestige, contacts and a means to earn more 
money. These members give the secret planners another layer of protection and 
respectability. Many CFR members in the media are in this category. Carroll 
Quigley, a professor and former teacher of President Clinton, wrote Tragedy and 
Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, describing in 1,348 pages the behind- 
the-scenes influence of bankers like the Morgans, Rothschilds, and Rockefellers.' 
Quigley, the official biographer of the CFR, said there was an inner circle who 
directed things, partly by manipulating a larger, outer circle through persuasion, 
patronage, and social pressure. C.B. Dall said: "Few members of the CFR know 
the long-range plans of its small top-management group."" While membership in 
these organizations doesn't mean there is monolithic servitude to the objectives as 
set forth by the leadership, all members of the groups described in this chapter 
support certain objectives like world government, NAFTA, and GATT. 

However much money and power these people obtain, it is never enough. It is 
difficult for normal people to understand the deep insecurity in those promoting 



14 Treason The New World Order 



the new world order. In 1776 Benjamin Franklin wrote: "Sir, there are two pas- 
sions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. ..the love of power 
and the love of money.. ..When united in view of the same object, they have in 
many minds the most violent effects." The Bible warns: "For the love of money is 
the root of all evil...." 7 The drive to control people for money and power is relent- 
less. Disagreements sometimes occur in these factions, but arguments are settled 
behind the scenes. Such disagreements are usually based on the means, not on the 
end goal of world domination and greater wealth. However, there are also commu- 
nist and Catholic factions pushing plans for world domination that are in sharp 
agreement with the corporate plan for a world government 

In speaking about the plans of the secret government, one is describing 
treason. A second, often unrelated factor is the vast corruption that has overtaken 
America because the rule of money has replaced the rule of law. Organized gangs 
steal whatever they can, usually with no participation by the secret government, 
although there may be an occasional alliance as for example when the CIA and 
mafia raided certain banks during the S&L scandal. As Ambrose Evans Pritchard, 
the Washington, D.C. based reporter for the London Telegraph, said there is so 
much corruption in America that it is now like many third world countries he has 
reported from. A third factor to consider is the bureaucracy and the slow but 
inevitable growth of government. Those who want the federal government to 
dominate all aspects of our lives are adept at using the bureaucracy to assist in 
achieving their goals. In The Twilight of Democracy, released in 1995, Patrick 
Kennon, a former CIA official, said democracy "has become marginal as a system 
of government" so we should turn to bureaucratic experts. 

Some may ask why there is little information about the secret government in 
the press if they really rule America. It is because the corporate elite owns the 
national media. Many books like None Dare Call It Treason and None Dare Call It 
Conspiracy" list the owners of the national media in the CFR and TC. The 
interaction of the press, intelligence community, government, and our corporate 
masters is exemplified by the career of Leslie Gelb. In 1984, the Washington 
Post, and then the New York Times, said New York Times reporter Leslie Gelb 
had cooperated with the CIA during the Carter administration in 1978 to recruit 
reporters in Europe to publish stories that would encourage people to support 
development of the neutron bomb. Gelb worked in the State and Defense Depart- 
ments under Johnson and Carter. Today he is president of the CFR. 

Over the years the national media has issued brief reports on the corporate 
elite acknowledging their influence. In the September 1, 1961 issue of the 
Christian Science Monitor, the CFR was described as "probably one of the most 
influential, semipublic organizations in the field of foreign policy. ...It has staffed 
almost every key position of every administration since FDR." In a May 1962 
article in Esquire, Richard H. Rovere said: "The directors of the CFR make up a 
sort of Presidium for that part of the Establishment that guides our destiny as a 
nation." On November 21, 1971, Anthony Lukas said, in the New York Times, 
"For the last three decades American foreign policy has remained largely in the 
hands of men — the overwhelming majority of them Council members (CFR) 
....One of the most remarkable aspects of this remarkable organization. ..is how 
little is known about it outside a narrow circle of East Coast insiders." On October 
30, 1993, the Washington Post assured us that the CFR is in charge and all is 
well. A column by CFR member Richard Harwood acknowledged that many gov- 



The Secret Government 15 



ernment leaders are in the CFR and this organization manages foreign affairs and 
the military-industrial complex. Harwood said 10 percent of the CFR now come 
from the media, and he listed key people in the national media who are CFR 
members." 

Quigley described the early influence of Cecil Rhodes in establishing certain 
secret societies, usually called Round Table organizations in various countries. 
Rhodes also established Rhodes scholarships for people to attend Oxford Univer- 
sity. The groups kept in touch through correspondence, visits, and the quarterly 
magazine, The Round Table, which was established in 1910. In 1919 the Royal 
Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) was founded in London. They 
controlled many university chairs and newspapers like The Times of London and 
The Observer. On December 14, 1992 Christopher Hitchens in The Nation 
described how the Rhodes alumni work together as part of a ruling elite. Many of 
these people became very influential in government. 

With a British perspective A.K. Chesterton, in The New Unhappy Lords, 
described how the secret government has dominated the major events of the 20th 
century. Chesterton first learned of the secret government in England when, as a 
journalist, he discovered that they could bring people from throughout the world to 
London to attend conferences during World War II. Even the British government 
couldn't do this. The CFR, established in 1921, was an outgrowth of this early 
British influence. From the start the CFR controlled The New York Times, Herald 
Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, and Washington Post. Controlling the 
national media was always understood to be crucial. 

According to Quigley, "There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an 
international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the 
radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may 
identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the 
Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of the operations 
of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for 
two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no 
aversion to it or to most of its aims. ...In general my chief difference of opinion is 
that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant 
enough to be known.'"" 

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less 
than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate 
the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. 
This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the 
world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meet- 
ings and conferences." The privately owned Bank of International Settlements in 
Basle, Switzerland played a key role in this interaction of central banks. "The 
growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic 
control and a use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect 
injury of all other economic groups."" 

In his next book, The Anglo American Establishment, Quigley had trouble 
finding a publisher. His first book was withdrawn after 9,000 copies were sold, 
despite its popularity, and the negatives were destroyed. The corporate controllers 
were displeased with what Quigley revealed. In this new book Quigley said: "It is 
not easy for an outsider to write the history of a secret group of this kind, but... it 
should be done, for this group is. ..one of the most important historical facts of the 



16 Treason The New World Order 



twentieth century." Quigley admitted "In this group were persons whose lives have 
been a disaster to our way of life." The front cover of this book shows the U.S. 
flag upside down which has long been a sign of distress. The cover also shows the 
U.S. flag inside the British flag. For decades England has controlled the U.S. far 
more than people understand. 

The corporate elite hoped to establish a world government using the League of 
Nations, but this failed partly because the U.S. wouldn't join that organization. 
Colonel Edward House helped establish the CFR, and in Philip Dru, he said his 
goal was for "socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx." The book described a 
"conspiracy" to capture both political parties and use them to create a socialist 
world government. The plan included electing a president by using "deception 
regarding his real opinions and intentions." Written in 1912, the book called for a 
graduated income tax and establishing a state-controlled central bank. These laws 
were passed in 1913, and many other goals outlined in the book also became 
reality. House called for a one-world government, one-world army, and one-world 
economy ruled by an Anglo-Saxon financial oligarchy with a dictator served by a 
12 man council. Our Constitution would be greatly changed. President Roosevelt 
wrote Colonel House on November 23, 1933 "The real truth of the matter is, as 
you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the 
government ever since the days of (President) Andrew Jackson — and I am not 
wholly excepting the Administration of W.W. (Woodrow Wilson). The country is 
going through a repetition of Jackson's fight with the Bank of the U.S. — only on 
a far bigger and broader basis." 12 

The CFR is based in New York with a branch in Washington, D.C. In recent 
years it has grown to over 3,000 members. David Rockefeller was chairman of the 
board from 1970-1985, and Henry Kissinger is a prominent member. The 1952 
CFR annual report said its members sometimes suspend their membership when 
they join the government, and the Recce congressional investigation said there 
were secret CFR members. As suggested by the writings of its members, its goal 
is to condition the people to rely on government as the solution to all problems 
and to pull the country into a one world government directed by the UN. The CFR 
position of promoting free trade and a world government controlled by the elites of 
the U.S., Europe, and Japan with limited democracy is well expressed in The 
Management of Interdependence: A Preliminary View, by Miriam Camps. 

The CFR has dominated U.S. foreign policy and the State Department for 
decades through its publications, meetings, and private study groups. Kraft, in a 
July, 1958 Harpers article, said its study groups played a key role in shaping the 
UN charter. Weekly in the news, CFR experts discuss foreign affairs as guest 
experts. Rear Admiral Chester Ward, a CFR member for 16 years, said: "Once the 
ruling members of the CFR have decided that the U.S. Government should adopt a 
particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of CFR are put to work to 
develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy, and to 
confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition."" Just re- 
cently a CFR panel proposed ending a 19-year policy that prevented the press from 
working for the CIA, and this is probably what will happen. The CFR announces 
policy and the U.S. government follows orders." 

"The most powerful clique in these elitist groups have one objective in 
common — they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the 
national independence of the U.S." They want to end national boundaries and racial 



The Secret Government 17 



and ethnic loyalties, supposedly to increase business and ensure world peace. What 
they strive for would inevitably lead to dictatorship and loss of freedoms by the 
people. The CFR was founded for "the purpose of promoting disarmament and 
submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful 
one-world government. ...This lust to surrender the sovereignty and independence of 
the U.S. is pervasive throughout most of the membership...."" 

FBI Bureau File 62-5256 shows that the FBI has investigated the CFR several 
times since 1931 especially for Nazi and communist activities. CFR headquarters 
is near the old Soviet Embassy to the UN. Obtained through a Freedom of Infor- 
mation Act request, the 371 -page file, with 336 pages released, had 263 instances 
of censoring. The record shows that, starting with Roosevelt, various presidents 
have blocked FBI investigations of the CFR citing national defense. It is quite 
unusual for a president to intervene in such investigations, and this is one more 
sign of the CFR's power. Over the years two ex-FBI agents have written books 
strongly attacking the CFR for its treasonous activities. Dan Smoot wrote The 
Invisible Government, and W. Cleon Skousen wrote The Naked Capitalist. Ted 
Gunderson and other ex-FBI agents also strongly attack CFR activities. Days after 
Hoover started another major investigation of the CFR, he died mysteriously. His 
successor, Patrick Gray III, started another investigation of the CFR, and he was 
forced to resign eight days after receiving detailed information about a CFR con- 
spiracy against the U.S. government. The next FBI director, Clarence Kelley, was 
a CFR member. On March 15, 1974 he lied and wrote to Senator Hartke that the 
FBI had never investigated the CFR." 

The Trilateral Commission was established in 1973 by David Rockefeller 
after he read Zbigniew Brzezinski's book, Between Two Ages, which praised 
socialism and said the U.S. is becoming obsolete so we should join a one world 
government. National sovereignty was no longer a viable concept. The U.S. Con- 
stitution should be rewritten while the existing federal system of having sovereign 
states was no longer necessary. He called for an alliance among North America, 
Western Europe, Japan, and ultimately, the communist countries. He said: 
"Marxism represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man's 
universal vision. ...Though Stalinism may have been a needless tragedy for both 
the Russian people and communism as an ideal, there is the intellectually tan- 
talizing possibility that for the world at large it was. ..a blessing in disguise."" 

These were strange words for a man who became President Carter's National 
Security Advisor; however, this was magic to David Rockefeller. He hired 
Brzezinski to direct the TC and brought in Carter as well. Comrade Rockefeller in 
1972 made the remarkable statement: "The social experiment in China under 
Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human 
history."" Over 60 million Chinese died in Mao's experiment. Based in New York 
City, the TC has several hundred members from Western Europe, Japan, Canada, 
and the U.S. with a goal of fostering closer cooperation among these regions to 
establish a global government. 

The TC published The Crisis of Democracy, which claimed there was a crisis 
and excess of democracy because citizens had become too politically active. The 
democratic surge had created a "democratic distemper... .A pervasive spirit of 
democracy may pose an intrinsic threat and undermine all forms of association, 
weakening the social bonds which hold together family, enterprise, and commu- 
nity. ...An excess of democracy means a deficit in governabilily...." Thus there was 



18 Treason The New World Order 



a need to restrain the American people. It was deemed necessary to protect the 
elites and restore a more equitable relationship between government authority and 
the people. Since the media had become too critical of government policy, there 
was a need to restrict freedom of the press and change the way officials are elected 
in order to weaken the people's influence." 

The Bilderberg group was founded in 1954 in Europe. According to TC- 
approved sources, its first meeting in 1954 was financed by the CIA." It has an 
annual meeting, usually in Europe, and the Rothschilds play a major role in its 
affairs. In 1990 American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission, by Stephen 
Gil, explained the activities of the TC and the Bilderbergers. Many members are in 
the European aristocracy, while American members are often also in the CFR. Its 
1995 meeting in Switzerland was guarded by the Swiss army, which is strange for 
a private group. A recent member is William Kristol, editor of Rupert Murdocks' 
Weekly Standard. A relative unknown Kristol suddenly became an expert on many 
talk shows. When Kristol speaks he often represents the Bilderberg group. After 
Dole won the nomination, Kristol attacked him in the Weekly Standard because 
the Bilderberg group wants Clinton reelected. Kristol should register as a foreign 
lobbyist. 

In a private June, 1991 Bilderberg meeting David Rockefeller said: "We are 
grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine, and other 
great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their 
promise of discretion for almost forty years. ...It would have been impossible for 
us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of 
publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared 
to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intel- 
lectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determina- 
tion practiced in past centuries." 

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (CEIP) is another corporate 
group. Officially it is another Washington think-tank. For several years it was 
directed by Alger Hiss, the former senior State Department official found guilty of 
perjury for denying he'd copied government papers for the Soviet Union. And 
Councils on World Affairs groups exist in many cities across the U.S. Allied to 
the CFR and the State Department, these groups hold lectures to promote an 
international outlook. 

There is also the World Federalist Association (WFA) based in Washington, 
D.C., which was previously called the United World Federalists, with members 
like Ronald Reagan and George Bush. Founded in 1947 its membership has 
dwindled to around 9,000 from a peak of 40,000 in the 1950s. Unlike the other 
corporate fronts, this group has openly called for immediate world government. 
One of its early brochures, Beliefs, Purposes, Policies, said its aim was to "create 
a world federal government with authority to enact, interpret and enforce world law 
adequate to maintain peace. ...World law should be enforceable directly upon 
individuals." Nations in a world government should have no right of secession, 
direct taxes should be paid by individuals, and there should be a world police force 
with nations being disarmed except for light arms to deal with internal matters. 

The first WFA head Cord Meyer, Jr., who later became a senior CIA official, 
in 1947, wrote Peace or Anarchy, in which he called for a world government, full 
national disarmament, and a UN army that controlled all nuclear weapons. If a 
nation attempted to overthrow the UN, it would be crushed. The sovereign-nation 



The Secret Government 19 



state was called the great threat to peace, and individual citizens must submit 
themselves to world law and UN courts. The cold war required "total preparedness" 
which meant "totalitarianism for American citizens. ...This brutalization of life 
must be extended even to the control of the mind. Propaganda will be substituted 
for fact, and official ideology will supplant the free search for truth. Every source 
of public information. ..must be perverted. Those who dissent will (ultimately) 
face arrest.'"' 

The journal, Foreign Affairs, with a circulation of 115,000, is the mouthpiece 
of the CFR. Over the years it has introduced important new foreign policies that 
became official U.S. government policy. For instance, George Kennan's contain- 
ment of communism and Richard Nixon's position about reopening relations with 
Communist China were first announced in this journal. The journal, Foreign 
Policy, is published by the CEIP, while the quarterly, World Federalist, is 
published by the WFA. Also, if you want to see what is planned for our future, 
read Futurist magazine. From describing a cashless society to implants to control 
people, this publication reveals much. 

These organizations have interlocking members with a common goal of 
establishing a one world government by dividing the world into three regions: 
Europe, North and South America, and the Pacific Union under the UN. Members 
comes from the economic, political, charitable, media, religious, educational, and 
academic elites. A recent book, Who's Who of the Elite by Robert G. Ross, Sr., 
lists most members in these groups. 

Every administration since 1920 has included members of the CFR which has 
dominated the federal government, especially the Departments of Defense, State, 
and Treasury, since World War II. Thomas Dewey, the Republican presidential 
candidate in 1944 and 1948, was a CFR member as was Eisenhower, Nixon, 
Bush, Stevenson, Kennedy, Humphrey, and McGovern. Over 70 of Kennedy's 
appointments were members of these organizations. At the end of None Dare Call 
It Conspiracy, by Gary Allen, is a list of 110 members of the CFR Nixon 
appointed to his regime. Most key officials in Carter's administration were 
members of these groups, while Bush had 380 CFR members in his government. 
Clinton is a member of the CFR and TC. The May 21, 1995 Arkansas Democrat 
Gazette discussed Clinton's attending the 1991 Bilderberger convention and his 
alignment with Rockefeller. Over 80 percent of the heads of the federal govern- 
ment executive branches since World War II have been members of these groups. 

CFR members in Clinton's regime include Secretary of State Christopher, 
Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt, Secretaries of Treasury Lloyd Bentsen and 
Robert Rubin, Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala, Secretary 
of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros, Deputy Secretary of State 
Strobe Talbott, Under Secretary for Political Affairs Peter Tarnoff, Assistant 
Secretary of State for East Asian and Public Affairs Winston Lord, National 
Security Advisor Anthony Lake, UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright, recent CIA 
Director James Woolsey and current CIA head John Deutch (also in TC), Council 
of Economic Advisors Chairman Laura Tyson, and White House Science Advisor 
John Gibbons. This is only a partial list. 

Former House speaker Foley and present House speaker Newt Gingrich, as 
well as former Senate majority leader George Mitchell, and former House majority 
leader Gephardt are members of the CFR, as are Supreme Court justices Stephen 
Breyer, Sandra O'Connor, and Ruth Ginsburg. Breyer and Ginsburg were only two 



20 Treason The New World Order 



of three U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges in the CFR. This nation of about 
255 million people is more than capable of producing many dedicated public 
servants outside these elite groups yet they continue to dominate the government 
and the press rarely discusses this." 

Over the decades many heads of state and leaders of international organizations 
like NATO and the World Bank visit CFR headquarters in New York. In 1990 
Nelson Mandela visited the CFR, as did Yeltsin soon after. Jean-Bertrand Aristide 
of Haiti gave a speech at the CFR on September 25, 1991. In 1995, when Castro 
visited New York, he promptly went to CFR headquarters to meet corporate lead- 
ers. U.S. foreign policy has been manipulated for decades to promote world 
government. 

Leaders of various governments understand where real power resides, so rep- 
resentatives of the secret government are allowed to intervene in world affairs. In 
April, 1994 a private group led by Henry Kissinger and Lord Carrington, the 
former British Foreign Secretary, went to South Africa with "some private 
citizens" to settle things. Officially the mission was not labeled a success; how- 
ever, shortly after this visit Chief Buthelezi finally agreed to bring his party into 
the electorial process, and peaceful elections took place with a transition of 
governments. In the spring of 1994, Selig Harrison from the CEIP visited North 
Korea to mediate the quarrel over North Korea obtaining nuclear arms. In mid- 
June, 1994 former President Carter also visited Norm Korea. In December, 1994 
Rep. Richardson, another CFR member, visited North Korea. Even the North 
Koreans understand who really controls America, so they are willing to meet 
corporate representatives. Richardson went to Burma, and the imprisoned Burmese 
leader Aung San Suu Kyi was soon released. He also visited Iraq, and brought 
home two imprisoned Americans. Journalists like Cokie Roberts wondered in 
amazement how Richardson was so effective! In July, 1995 Kissinger met with 
senior U.S. and Chinese officials to improve the worsening relations. 

National Security and the U.S. Constitution declared that "post-World War II 
and pre-Vietnam foreign policy operated in the context of an establishment con- 
sensus, brokered by major East Coast diplomatic and financial figures active in the 
CFR."" In 1994 Clinton said he would renew the most-favored trade status for 
China without tying it to human rights concerns. Shortly before this announce- 
ment, the TC released Triangle Paper number 45 "An Emerging China in a World 
of Interdependence" urging that China be allowed into existing regional organi- 
zations and be involved in security matters. If you want to learn what is in store 
for U.S. foreign policy, read CFR and TC reports. 

The great danger to our Republic is that the traitors, although small in 
numbers, are a dedicated, well-financed, and well-organized group of utterly ruth- 
less fanatics with no morals, who will use any method to establish a world 
government police state. While this is happening, most people ignore the evidence 
and watch football. This is how the communists and Nazis took control. In the 
20th century, some have understood this danger. 

John F. Hylan, Mayor of New York City, said on March 26, 1922: "The real 
menace of our Republic is the invisible government which like a giant octopus 
sprawls its slimy length over our city, state, and nation. Like the octopus of real 
life, it operates under cover of a self-created screen. ...It seizes in its long and pow- 
erful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our 
courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection....At the 



The Secret Government 21 



head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests and a small group of 
powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. (They) 
virtually run the U.S. government for their own selfish purposes. They practically 
control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use 
the leading men of private organizations, and resort to every device to place in 
nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the 
dictates of corrupt big business. They connive at centralization of government on 
the theory that a small group of hand-picked, privately controlled individuals in 
power can be more easily handled than a larger group among whom there will 
most likely be men sincerely interested in public welfare." 14 

In 1954 Senator Jenner said: "Today the path to total dictatorship in the U.S. 
can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by Congress, the President, 
or the people... .We have a well-organized political-action group in this country, 
determined to destroy our Constitution and establish a one-party state. ...The im- 
portant point to remember about this group is not its ideology but its 
organization. It is a dynamic, aggressive, elite corps, forcing its way through 
every opening, to make a breach for a collectivist one-party state. It operates 
secretly, silently, continuously to transform our Government without suspecting 
that change is under way. ...If I seem to be extremist, the reason is that this 
revolutionary clique cannot be understood, unless we accept the fact that they are 
extremist. It is difficult for people governed by reasonableness and morality to 
imagine the existence of a movement which ignores reasonableness and boasts of 
its determination to destroy, which ignores morality, and boasts of its cleverness 
in outwitting its opponents by abandoning all scruples. This ruthless power-seek- 
ing elite is a disease of our century. ...This group. ..is answerable neither to the 
President, the Congress, nor the courts. It is practically irremovable." The 
senator's two page speech should be read by every American." Over the decades, 
many in Congress have attacked the power of the secret government. 

In 1953 and 1954 the Reece Committee investigated the tax-exempt founda- 
tions and their relationship to left-wing groups. At that time Congress said CFR 
"productions are not objective but are directed overwhelmingly at promoting the 
globalistic concept." The CFR had become "in essence an agency of the U.S. 
government... carrying its internationalist bias with it." However, little changed and 
the investigation soon ended, because the foundations were too powerful. These 
foundations work together supporting common goals like transforming education, 
supporting the UN, and supporting foreign aid to promote the new world order. 
Ford Foundation chairman John J. McCloy was also chairman of the Chase Man- 
hattan Bank and the CFR. The Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie Foundations and 
others were established to restore the reputations of big bankers and large corpora- 
tions which were criticized harshly before World Wars I and II. They also avoided 
paying taxes while taking others' money as they attained great power and 
influence." 

In 1958 Rene Wormser the general counsel of the Reece Committee wrote 
Foundations: Their Power and Influence revealing how the tax-exempt foundations 
were used by the corporate elite to secretly shape and influence American life 
through social manipulation and political power. From research grants to univer- 
sities to influence in government these foundations are an unchecked power that is 
"interlocking and self-perpetuating." The author said more public control should be 
exerted over how these foundations spend their money, and they should be banned 



22 Treason The New World Order 



from participating in political activities. Public trustees should be required in 
foundations, courts should examine their activities, and some foundations should 
lose their tax-exempt status." 

Certain popular books contributed to attacks on the corporate rulers. None 
Dare Call It Treason by John Stormer and None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary 
Allen sold millions of copies. Both books described in detail the corporate elite 
and their alignment with communism. A Choice Not An Echo and The Grave- 
diggers by Phyllis Schlafly said the Republican party was secretly controlled by 
the Bilderberger group and global communist domination was the goal. 

For years conservative factions of the Republican party, especially in the 
West, attacked the CFR. Barry Goldwater said: "The CFR.. .believes national 
boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.'"* "The TC.is 
intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and 
banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the U.S. ...In 
my view, the TC represents a skilled, coordinated effort to seize control and con- 
solidate the four centers of power — political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiast- 
ical. ...What the Trilaterals truly intend is the creation of a worldwide economic 
power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved. As 
managers and creators of the system, they will rule the future."" 

R. Buckminster Fuller, a widely respected observer of our culture, also under- 
stood the great power of what he called the invisible government. In Critical Path, 
in the chapter "Legally Piggily," Fuller describes how large corporations and their 
lawyers control the U.S. "The U.S.A. is not run by its would-be 'democratic' gov- 
ernment. All the latter can do is try to adjust to the initiatives already taken by 
(leaders of the) great corporations. Nothing could be more pathetic than the role 
that has to be played by the President of the United States, whose power is ap- 
proximately zero. Nevertheless, the news media and most over-thirty-years-of-age 
U.S.A. citizens carry on as if the President has supreme power." The invisible 
power groups manipulate us through "its enormous media control and its election- 
funding and lobbying power of the American political game.'" 

On May 22, 1975 Fuller testified before the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee stating, when asked where our country and people were going, "Not 
only have all the big corporations become transnational and taken all the former 
U.S.A. gold and other negotiable assets with them. ...Today most of the people in 
America still think of their nation as being the most powerful of the world 
nations — ergo, free to make its own most constructive moves. Quite the opposite 
is now true. ..The U.S. is both internally and externally bankrupt." In the 1960s 
and 1970s various sources such as C.B. Dall in FDR, My Exploited Father-in- 
Law," said most of the gold in Fort Knox had been taken by the bankers because 
the U.S. was bankrupt. Fuller also said the second great gasoline shortage of June, 
1979 was created by the invisible government to divert the public from concern 
generated by the Three Mile Island radiation accident. 

In 1980 the American Legion (AL) passed Resolution 773 at their national 
convention demanding that Congress investigate the TC and CFR. This resolution 
was introduced into the House February 4, 1981 by Rep. McDonald, but Congress 
did nothing. In 1981 the AL introduced Resolution 243 again asking Congress to 
investigate the CFR and TC. The Veterans of Foreign Wars introduced a similarly 
worded Resolution 460 at their national convention in 1981. 



The Secret Government 23 



The influence of the secret government has also been discussed in several 
elections. Christopher Lydon, in The Atlantic Monthly, said conspiracy theories 
are banned in mainstream American journalism and then, to his surprise, described 
how Rockefeller and the TC got Carter, a member of the TC and a man from a 
small southern state with no base in the democratic party, elected president. For 
months no one except the press took Carter's candidacy seriously. Time put Carter 
on the cover in 1971 and continued to present him in glowing terms.' 2 

A chapter in The Carter Presidency and Beyond describes how the TC pro- 
moted Carter. The Rockefellers had old business ties in Atlanta; David Horowitz, 
co-author of The Rockefellers, said "Atlanta is Rockefeller South." Rockefeller 
intervened with the black leadership in Atlanta to get national black support for 
Carter. As president, Carter promoted the agenda of the corporate elite. Robertson, 
in The New World Order, describes how Carter and his administration were domi- 
nated by the New York banker groups, especially through the CFR. One reporter 
said: "It would be unfair to say the TC dominates the Carter administration. The 
TC is the Carter administration."" On the same morning I read the Atlantic 
Monthly articles about Carter, I also read several articles in the Nation" which 
described how the media, especially Time, had distorted the news to protect 
Clinton, especially concerning his involvement with money laundering, the CIA, 
and drug running in Arkansas. I could have been reading about the same candidate 
except for the 19 year difference. 

It was fairly common, up to the early 1980s, to attack the power of the TC 
and the CFR. Reagan and Connally harshly attacked them during the 1980 election 
campaign partly because they got Carter elected President. Bush resigned from the 
CFR over the uproar but his CFR membership helped cost him the Republican 
nomination. However, once elected, Reagan brought many TC and CFR people 
into his administration. 

By the mid 1980s these corporate groups had come to so dominate the na- 
tional media and both political parties that they were rarely discussed. It was as if 
they never existed, despite the fact that they have dominated every White House for 
decades. In 1988 former Interior Secretary James Watt was a lone voice when he 
said the Reagan government was greatly influenced by the TC, which was using 
its influence to "protect their fortunes and preserve their political clout." 

Congress and the president are increasingly irrelevant to the secret govern- 
ment. The CFR uses money and lobbyists to control Congress, as shown by the 
passage of NAFTA and GATT. The bankers are quite sophisticated, using lobby- 
ists so some politicians have sold out to them without even realizing it. Many 
politicians do what they are ordered to do by various special interest groups which 
are secretly controlled by the corporations with their unlimited funds and influence. 

These organizations have enormous economic and political clout. For in- 
stance, the Business Roundtable is a lobbyist group for major corporations and 
banks that played a major role in getting NAFTA and GATT passed. Both 
political parties have key leaders who are members of these elite groups. The 
parties often disagree because, if the Democratic and Republican leadership sup- 
ported every bill, it would become too obvious that we really have only one 
national political party. Joseph Kraft said: "The Council (CFR) plays a special 
part in helping bridge the gap between the two parties, affording unofficially a 
measure of continuity when the guard changes in Washington."" The present 
dominant power of the corporate elite represents a decline of American pluralism. 



24 Treason The New World Order 



Labor, farmers, small businesses, professionals, environmentalists, and consumers 
now have little say in the affairs of the nation, because big business controls both 
political parties. Money rules all. 

Many believe one can trace the roots of the corporate elite and the secret gov- 
ernment back to the late 1700s with the influence of the Illuminati. However, to 
go into that here would go beyond the scope of this book. There are many 
excellent texts that readers can study, and some of these books are listed in the 
bibliography. Other groups in the secret government such as the Order of Skull 
and Bones,'" the Club of Rome, and 33rd degree Masons should be studied by the 
serious student to understand our present predicament. Conspirators' Hierarchy: 
The Story of the Committee of 300, by Dr. John Coleman, is a good review on 
the broad reach of the secret government into many areas of society. 



25 



Chapter IV 
The New World Order 



"We can have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated 
in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both." 

Justice Louis D. Brandeis 

"The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace and conspires against 
it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than 
autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces, as public enemies, all who 
question its methods or throw light upon its crimes." 

Abraham Lincoln 



In hundreds of books, articles, studies, and speeches in the 20th century, many 
influential and powerful people including many in Congress have called for a new 
world order and the surrender of U.S. sovereignty and individual freedoms to a one 
world government usually, involving the UN. People who attack these plans are 
called paranoid conspiracy theorists, extremists, or racists, but the national media 
ignores this extensive literature. Consider this, and you will begin to appreciate 
how the press deliberately and maliciously uses propaganda to lie to the people. 
When confronted with this evidence, elitists deny the existence of this literature or 
lie and say this is no longer the policy. Some, like Kenneth S. Stern in A Force 
Upon the Plain, make a brief comment about one part of this literature, down- 
playing and making fun of it to fool the public. People who think it is paranoid to 
be concerned about those who call for a world government should ask why this 
literature exists and why critics of the right almost never discuss this material. 
When you carefully study this literature and the events of the 20th century, the 
threat to our rights and way of life in a one world government with a new 
corporate-inspired Constitution is obvious. 

During the 20th century many prominent leaders have supported the new 
world order and world government. For instance, on May 13, 1947 in London 
Winston Churchill said: "Unless some effective world supergovernment, for the 
purposes of preventing war, can be set up and begin its reign, the prospects for 
peace and human progress are dark and doubtful.. ..Without a United Europe there 
is no prospect of world government.'" Elsewhere Churchill said: "The creation of 
an authoritative world order is the ultimate aim toward which we must strive." 
Charles De Gaulle said: "Nations must unite in a world government or perish." 
Nehru said: "We have arrived at a stage where the next step must comprise a world 
and all its states, each having economic independence, but submitting to the 
authority of world organization.'" 



26 Treason The New World Order 



Secrecy is very important to these people. While many leading politicians 
support a world government, they refuse to openly discuss this topic with voters. 
In a 1976 interview in Transition, Senator Cranston warned against publicly pro- 
moting world government since "the more talk about world government the less 
chance of achieving it, because it frightens people...."' Jeffrey A. Baker said: 
"They camouflage their actions through the actions of others, constantly hiding 
behind people or institutions of purported good intent." When information leaks 
out, like the Report From Iron Mountain, it is always attacked by the media and 
corporate-approved experts. These experts hide their plans by denial or by claiming 
they are protecting the people's rights. In 1931 Arnold Toynbee said: "We are at 
present working discreetly with all our might to wrest this mysterious force called 
sovereignty (from) nation states. ...All the time we are denying with our lips what 
we are doing with our hands, because to impugn the sovereignty of the local 
nation states of the world is still a heresy...." 

The Brandt Commission, a multinational group of national leaders and 
international financiers, defined the new world order as "A supra-national authority 
to regulate world commerce and industry; an international organization that would 
control the production and consumption of oil; an international currency that 
would replace the dollar; a world development fund that would make funds 
available to free and communist nations alike; an international police force to 
enforce the edicts of the New World Order." 

The goal of the new world order is for the large corporations and superrich to 
totally control the world's population, resources, communications, finances, trade, 
and labor. This involves manipulating economics, politics, society, and religion 
on a global level. Lincoln Bloomfield wrote "Arms Control and World Govern- 
ment" in the July, 1962 journal World Politics. The article began: "The notion of 
a world government is today — and perhaps for all time — a fantastic one." Walter 
B. Wriston, ex-chairman of Citicorp, wrote The Twilight of Sovereignty, ex- 
plaining how the information revolution was ending nation-state sovereignty. He 
said: "A truly global economy will require concessions of national power and 
compromises of national sovereignty that seemed impossible a few years ago and 
which even now we can but partly imagine." World citizenship is to become the 
standard. Already the Boy Scouts of America have a citizenship of the world merit 
badge. 

Individuals in all nations must submit to international law and a world court. 
World law, not our Constitution, will rule supreme, and a world parliament is 
planned. On June 14, 1992 on ABC's This Week with David Brinkley, ex-Reagan 
adviser Michael Deaver said: "In five years we're going to have a World Parlia- 
ment." Free trade with a stable system of payments is part of the plan, as is 
controlling the central bank in many countries like our Federal Reserve. These 
elitists believe the only way to make big money is through a monopoly. John D. 
Rockefeller once said "Competition is a sin." The free market myth is perpetuated 
by the giant corporations that strive to increase government regulation to limit 
competition, to enhance their profits and power. The plan is to also establish a 
new world religion and to remake the education system. 

To reach these goals requires the destruction of the nation state, sovereignty, 
patriotism, nationalism, property rights, and the family unit. In the book 
Experiences, Toynbee, who spent many years working at the Chatham House 
discussed in Chapter III, said: "We are now moving into a chapter of human 



The New World Order 27 



history in which our choice is going to be. ..between one world and no world. ...In 
the field of politics, nationalism is going to be subordinated to world-govern- 
ment "" Elsewhere Toynbee said: "The cult of sovereignty has become 

mankind's major religion. Its God demands human sacrifice." On September 29, 
1988, on ABC's Nightline Ted Koppel referred to nationalism as a virus. By 
controlling people, world government can be established. 

There is an intimate relationship between socialism and those promoting the 
new world order with a one world government. Many early Fabian socialists like 
H.G. Wells, Bertrand Russell, and George Bernard Shaw supported world govern- 
ment and an end to sovereignty. Fabian socialists established the London School 
of Economics to train government bureaucrats to enhance central government 
control. Ultimately socialism is a greater threat than is communism, because 
socialism uses a gradual and insidious approach to achieve total control over the 
people, while the objectives of communism are more obvious. In the early 1900s 
when plans for a world government were further developed, businessmen like Cecil 
Rhodes provided money and influence while socialist intellectuals contributed ideas 
to achieve world government. 

A constant strategy is to claim that governments must work together to solve 
the major problems of today. Supposedly, it is beyond the ability of individual 
nations to solve todays problems, so there must be a co-ordinated world strategy. 
A global approach with world government is needed to solve global problems, 
especially as the world gets more complex. Arnold Toynbee said: "In all developed 
countries a new way of life — a severely regimented way — will have to be imposed 
by a ruthless authoritarian government.'" The plan is to create a world army, world 
court, world currency, world bank, and world tax. Each state will have only a 
lightly armed police force, while private gun ownership will end. 

Previously, the nuclear threat was stressed. Jonathan Schell, in The Fate of 
the Earth, said world government was essential to avoid nuclear destruction. Today 
environmental concerns, third world poverty, food shortages, hunger, and national 
debts are more often used as an excuse for a world government. At a recent confer- 
ence of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, the German Chancellor 
said: "The stability of the new world order and the new global challenges require 
cooperation between all global players to fight organized crime, international 
terrorism, fundamentalism, and nationalism. The First Global Revolution A 
Report By the Council of the Club of Rome presented similar views. The Club of 
Rome is one of the corporate groups pushing for world government. Maurice 
Strong, a senior UN environmental official, said: We may get to the point where 
the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse." 

Supposedly, if certain steps aren't taken by the elites of the world, conditions 
will continue to deteriorate so the poor will inherit the earth and live in misery. 
The U.S. standard of living is being deliberately lowered to the lowest common 
denominator to match that of many other nations to promote world government. It 
is claimed that democracy, or rule by the people, has too many limitations to 
really work especially in the current grave crisis. "Democracy is no longer well 
suited for the tasks ahead.... Few politicians in office are sufficiently aware of the 
global nature of the problems in front of them and have little if any awareness of 
the interactions between the problems.'" Supposedly, the people need the wise 
hand of the elite, even if they don't realize this. The elite have decided this on their 
own and believe they must act to save the world, also making themselves rulers to 



28 Treason The New World Order 



save the people who have no say in the matter. The people must continue believ- 
ing they have a say in government, although that is a lie. CFR member George 
C. Lodge has just released Managing Globalization in the Age of Interdependence, 
in which he called for world "convergence and integration." If necessary, this 
convergence will be created by autocratically imposed fiat. Government will decide 
what the people need, and the people will be reeducated to accept this new ideol- 
ogy- 

Fateful Visions, edited by CFR members, reviews from many sources what a 
world government will entail. For instance, some declare a world government will 
have the right to militarily enter a nation when there is just a rumor that a nation 
will take disruptive action, or to support world government policy. A nation's 
leaders could be arrested and direct rule imposed as in Somalia. The world govern- 
ment army, at least 500,000 strong, will control all nuclear weapons, and 
extensive international inspection will be required to maintain control. Admittedly, 
there may be a misuse of international police powers. As the debate to establish 
world government intensifies, civil war might occur in some countries as local 
patriots try to block their nation from joining a world government, and foreign 
troops will be used to defeat the patriots and support the pro-world government 
faction. Bloomfield explains how a UN international military force would be used 
to invade various countries.' In other words, if the U.S. government continues 
moving towards world government and widespread violence starts with the militias 
trying to save our Republic, UN troops would be brought in to destroy the 
militias. In addition, once world government is established, secession will not be 
allowed. Once a consensus has formed to establish a world government, all nations 
will have to join it. If some nations refused to do this, it supposedly would 
threaten peace, so force would be used against them." 

While most people remain asleep, elitists have for decades had deadly serious 
debates about how to create a one world government. The Institute for World 
Order, Inc. (now the World Policy Institute) through its newsletter, numerous 
books, and lectures has promoted world government for years. Richard Falk, in the 
Yale Law Journal, reviewed four proposed strategics to create a world government. 
The first is the Utopian legalism of Clark and Sohn, as discussed in Introduction 
to World Peace Through World Law, and World Peace Through World Law. A 
second approach is Kissinger's geopolitical power politics, while a third school of 
thought involving the multinational corporations and Trilateral Commission is 
more geoeconomic. A fourth view involves global populism and human dignity. 
Falk rejected the first approach as too unrealistic and the second and third 
approaches for being too ruthless and exploitative. As a Utopian dreamer, he 
believes the fourth approach will best serve the people. Falk and others also 
seriously debate the importance of time and a transitional period for the claimed 
paradigm shift into a world government." 

Paul Warburg, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 
February 17, 1950, said: "We shall have world government whether or not you 
like it — by conquest or consent." 1 " Warburg was a prominent Wall Street financier 
and CFR leader. His father helped establish the Federal Reserve. In 1959 he wrote 
The West in Crisis saying: "A world order without world law is an anachronism; 
and that, since war now means the extinction of civilization, a world which fails 
to establish the rule of law over the nation-states cannot long continue to exist. 
We are living in a perilous period of transition from the era of the fully sovereign 



The New World Order 29 



nation-state to the era of world government...." 11 The Economist June 22, 1991 
called for a global police force, an international court, and said the U.S. must 
submit to "a collective world order." 

The second Humanist Manifesto in 1973 said: "We deplore the division of 
humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human 
history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and 
to move toward the building of a world community. ..a system of world law and 
world order based upon transnational federal government." 

Several strategics are being used to create a world government. One plan is to 
gradually strength the UN and related international institutions. The UN has 
published many documents calling for its expanded role, and Global Bondage by 
Cliff Kincaid is a good reference on this. Second, regional governments and insti- 
tutions are developing. Third, economic union is being used to create a political 
union." The plan is to make people more dependent on each other, to become 
comfortable with international institutions and control. Richard N. Gardner said, in 
Foreign Affairs in April, 1974, "The hopeful aspect of the present situation is that 
even as nations resist appeals for 'world government' and 'the surrender of 
sovereignty,' technological, economic and political interests are forcing them to 
establish more and more far-ranging institutions to manage their mutual interde- 
pendence." David Korten of the People-Centered Development Forum, a pro-UN 
group, presented a paper at the 1995 International Development Conference 
revealing part of the strategy to create world government. He said, led by 
multinational banks, global consolidation was being promoted from above with 
NAFTA, GATT, and the Maastricht treaty, and it was being promoted from below 
by environmentalists, activists, and indigenous people. 

The plan to create a one world government using a UN type body has existed 
for decades. About the League of Nations in 1922 Foreign Affairs declared: 
"Obviously there is going to be no peace or prosperity for mankind so long as it 
remains divided into fifty or sixty independent states. ...The real problem today is 
that of world government."" The United Nations: Planned Tyranny, by V. Orval 
Watts, was published in 1955. In great detail, Walls described the coming one 
world government and the UN's role in it. One person I spoke to in researching 
this book told me her father, who worked in defense in the 1950s, learned of these 
plans. Another contact working in the U.S. military in the early 1980s was 
ordered to provide highly classified documents to the Soviets. When he refused, he 
was told that by the end of this century the U.S. and the Soviet Union would join 
in a one world government. When he still refused to commit treason, his career 
was ruined. 

Right from the start, the elite always planned for the UN to be a vehicle 
towards a one world corporate dictatorship. On September 7, 1948, The 
Philadelphia Inquirer quoted Senator Alben Barkley as stating: "The time is not yet 
mature for what we mean by world government. ...We must strengthen the UN 
before we can achieve our goal of world government." John Foster Dulles, in 
1950, wrote War or Peace saying: "The UN represents not a final stage in the 
development of world order, but only a primitive stage. Therefore its primary task 
is to create the conditions which will make possible a more highly developed 
organization. ...Then, perhaps, a world police force could work." 14 On September 
17, 1990, Time magazine said: "The Bush administration would like to make the 
UN a cornerstone of its plans to construct a New World Order." On March 6, 



30 Treason The New World Order 



1991, Bush told Congress: "Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A 
world in which there is a very real prospect of a new world order. ...A world where 
the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic 
vision of its founders." On February 1, 1992, Bush said: "My vision of a New 
World Order forsees a UN with a revitalized peacekeeping function. It is the sacred 
principles enshrined in the UN charter to which we henceforth pledge our 
allegiance." A president should only pledge his allegiance to the U.S. and the 
Constitution. The UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali recently said: "The 
time of absolute and exclusive sovereignty has passed; its theology was never 
matched by reality." 

A constant issue raised by elitists is a concern about overpopulation, food 
shortages, and the environment. Especially since the turn of the last century, vari- 
ous scientists have said overpopulation threatened economic growth and our very 
existence. George Bernard Shaw, a Fabian socialist and early supporter of world 
government, in 1928 wrote The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and 
Capitalism. He said people would be forcible fed, taught, and employed even if 
they didn't like this but "If it were discovered that you had not character and 
industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a 
kindly manner...." 

In Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress Upon 
Human Life and Thought, H.G. Wells said: "The ethical system which will 
dominate the world state, will be shaped primarily to favor... beautiful and strong 
bodies, clear and powerful minds. ..and to check the procreation of base and servile 
types. ...The new ethics will hold life to be a privilege and a responsibility. ..and 
the alternative in right conduct between living fully beautifully, and efficiently 
will be to die. ...The men of the New Republic (one world government) will have 
little pity and less benevolence. ...They will hold. ..that a certain portion of the 
population exists only on sufferance. ..and on the understanding that they do not 
propagate, and I do not foresee any reason to suppose that they will not hesitate to 
kill when that sufferance is abused. ...The men of the New Republic will not be 
squeamish either in facing or inflicting death. ...They will have an ideal that will 
make killing worth the while;. ...They will have the faith to kill. ...If deterrent 
punishments are used at all in the code of the future the deterrent will (be) good 
scientifically caused pain."" 

Franklin Roosevelt closely followed and supported Well's views on having a 
world government. On December 4, 1933 he wrote Wells saying: "I have read, 
with pleasure and profit, almost everything that you have written.... You are doing 
much to educate people everywhere, and for that I am grateful." On February 13, 
1935 he wrote Wells: "How do you manage to retain such extraordinary clear 
judgements?. ..I believe our (the New Deal) biggest success is making people think 
during these past two years. They may not think straight but they are thinking in 
the right direction — and your direction and mine are not so far apart...." 

Born into an English aristocratic family, the philosopher Bertrand Russell 
played a role in the British branch of the secret government. In various books like 
Fact or Fiction, The Impact of Science on Society, and The Prospects of Industrial 
Civilization, Russell called for world government. On July 11, 1955, he and 
others presented a manifesto claiming that nuclear war threatened humanity's 
survival, so national sovereignty must be limited. At times, Russell openly 
expressed his contempt for the common man. In The Impact of Science on Society 



The New World Order 31 



he discussed the planned terror: "I do not pretend that birth control is the only way 
in which population can be kept from increasing....War...has hitherto been disap- 
pointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. 
If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation 
survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. ...The state of 
affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded 
people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people's. There are three ways 
of securing a society that shall be stable as regards population. The first is that of 
birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and the third 
that of general misery except for a powerful minority. ...These considerations prove 
that a scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is a world 
government. ...Unless. ..one power or group of powers emerges victorious and 
proceeds to establish a single government of the world with a monopoly of armed 
force, it is clear that the level of civilization must continually decline...." 1 * 

In 1948 Julian Huxley, the first head of UNESCO, wrote UNESCO: Its 
Purpose and Its Philosophy. He spoke of "the implications of the transfer of full 
sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization. ...Political unification 
in some sort of world government will be required. ...Even though. ..any radical 
eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, 
it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined 
with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake 
so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable."" Ex- 
Senator William Benton said: "In its education program (UNESCO) can stress the 
ultimate need for world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the impli- 
cations of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world 
organization. ...Political unification in some sort of world government will be 
required." 

In 1968 the Club of Rome concluded that civilization would collapse unless 
the death rate was increased and the birth rate was lowered. Various investigators, 
like John Coleman, report the Club of Rome developed a plan Global 2000 to kill 
several billion people by 2050. The mass killings in Cambodia and Africa are 
early stages of this operation. Paul Ehrlich, famous for his work on the popula- 
tion threat, said it might be necessary to add "a sterilant to the drinking water or 
staple foods" to sterilize the entire population, giving the antidote to a select 
few. 1 " The forced sterilization programs of India and China may be the wave of the 
future in a corporate controlled society. In The Population Bomb, Ehrlich said: 
The population will drop from one of two solutions. The birth rate will be 
lowered or the "death rate solution" will be used through "war, famine, pestilence." 
Ehrlich's wife is a member of the Club of Rome." He also said the "time of sugar 
coated solutions is long gone," and in a recent PBS documentary Ehrlich said: "If 
you don't solve the population problem the environment will collapse and our 
civilization will go along with it." 

The UN Fund for Population Activities praised China's "exceptionally high 
implementation rate" and "high commitment" to population control methods such 
as abortion. The liberal New Republic recently said the UN acted with extreme 
slowness in Ethiopia regarding that nation's famine and then supported the gov- 
ernment so many more died. Much UN food aid went to the military instead of the 
people. In Somalia, the UN stayed away when other relief agencies tried to help. 
When the UN finally got involved there were many problems. In Rwanda, the UN 



32 Treason The New World Order 



helped the armed militias, which had killed almost a million people, take control 
of numerous refugee camps. One private aid official said the UN took the lead in 
supporting these militias. 10 

In 1969, U Thant said: "I do not wish to seem overdramatic but I can only 
conclude that from the information that is available to me as Secretary-General (of 
the UN) that the members of the UN have perhaps ten years left in which to sub- 
ordinate their ancient quarrels and launch a global partnership. ..to defuse the 
population explosion, and to supply the required momentum to development 
efforts." In 1987 the UN released a report, Our Common Future, claiming that in 
order to achieve sustainable development, lifestyle habits must be radically altered 
and closely regulated by government at all levels. Central planning was necessary 
under the UN's environmental bureaucracy. 

In Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity Revisited, William Ophuls called for a 
world government with coercive powers. In Preparing For the Twenty-First 
Century, Paul Kennedy described how the global outlook is causing a weakening 
of the nation state. Overpopulation represented a threat to the nation state and the 
large transnational corporations. Former Washington governor Dixy Ray said, in 
Environmental Overkill, "The future is to be world government, with central 
planning by the UN. ...If force is needed, it will be provided by a UN green- 
helmeted police force." Already there are the UN Commission on Sustainable 
Development, UN Global Environmental Facility, and the UN treaty Agenda 21. 
The UN is ready to regulate the world to have a sustainable environment. Jacques- 
Yves Cousteau, in his journal Calypso Log, said it was necessary to create "an 
international environmental police, 'green helmets,' who would be under the 
direction of the UN. Our planet needs guardians. ..free of the constraints 
of.. .national sovereignty." 

Foreign Affairs published an article with the ominous title "The Population 
Threat."" In Living Within Limits: Ecology, Economics and Population Taboos, 
Garrett Hardin said: "The issue of coercion must be faced. ...Loss of freedom is an 
inevitable consequence of unlimited population growth." Jacques-Yves Cousteau 
said: "It's terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized and to 
do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day." 25 In one year that would equal 
128 million people. At the UN Earth Summit in Rio, Cousteau said we have 10 
years to solve the overpopulation problem, and he urged "drastic, unconventional 
decisions." The horrible truth is that there are individuals behind the new world 
order who plan to exterminate vast numbers of people, so the elite will have a 
world that meets with their approval. Covert Action and other sources report that 
AIDS is really germ warfare." I discuss many population-extermination programs 
in Chapter XIX. 

To end overpopulation, many elitists call for controlling the family. Warren 
Bennis and Philip Slater said, in The Temporary Society "One cannot permit 
submission to parental authority if one wishes to bring about profound social 
change.... In order to effect rapid changes, any such centralized regime must mount 
a vigorous attack on the family lest the traditions of present generations be 
preserved." The state must "create an experiential chasm between parents and 
children to insulate the latter in order that they can more easily be indoctrinated 
with new ideas. The desire may be to cause an even more total submission to the 
state. ...One must teach (children) not to respect their tradition-bound elders, who 
are tied to the past and know only what is irrelevant."" As shown in Nazi Ger- 



The New World Order 33 



many and the Soviet Union, totalitarian governments weaken the family unit in 
order to transfer loyalty to the state. 

In the February, 1946 issue of Psychiatry, G.B. Chisholm said: "We have 
swallowed all manner of poisonous certainties fed us by our parents, our Sunday 
and day school teachers, our politicians, our priests. ...The re-interpretation and 
eventual eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of 
child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith in the 
certainties of the old people, these are the belated objectives. ..for charting the 
changes in human behavior.... Freedom from moralities means" to be "free from 
outmoded types of loyalties....'"' 

Garrett Hardin said: "It should be easy to limit a woman's reproduction by 
sterilizing her. ...People need to recognize that population control is needed to 
protect the quality of life for our children. The 'right' to breed implies ownership 
of children. This concept is no longer tenable. 'My' child's germ plasm is not 
mine; it is really only part of the community's store. I was merely the temporary 
custodian of part of it. If parenthood is a right, population control is impos- 
sible."" 

In the April, 1981 issue of The Futurist magazine, Gene Stephens said to 
lessen crime by 2000 much more control will be needed. "The movement to 
license or certify parents may be well under way." Usually couples will be allowed 
to raise their own children; however, certain parents will be forced to surrender 
"superior babies" to be raised by others the state deems more appropriate to be the 
parents. "Child breeding and rearing. ..may be considered too important to be left to 
chance...." Drugs and genetic engineering will be used so that "controlled breeding 
will result in fewer biological reasons for crime." 

In The Case for Compulsive Birth Control, Edgar R. Chasteen proposed 
subverting the traditional family by promoting alternative lifestyles. He said the 
birth rate would be lowered if citizens were made "politically insecure" through 
arrest and imprisonment with no right of appeal, no free speech, and invasion of 
the home. For compulsory population control, the public must be convinced that 
"parenthood (is) a privilege extended by society, rather than a right inherent in the 
individual. Accordingly, society has both the right and the duty to limit popula- 
tion when either its physical existence or its quality of life is threatened. ...There 
are no natural rights conferred upon man. ...Rights are derived from the law and the 
law is man-made."" The British surgeon Sir Roy Calne recently wrote Too Many 
People, in which he called for adopting many of China's birthing policies such as 
state-approved licensing to have children. The Manchester Guardian endorsed this 
saying: "If we don't sacrifice some freedoms we may be left with none." 

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child places the state over the 
family. Already in some countries where this convention has passed, UN repre- 
sentatives are interfering in traditional family practices, supposedly to protect 
children. Clinton is pushing to get this treaty passed in the Senate. Hillary 
Clinton's book It Takes a Village and Other Lessons Children Teach Us is a thinly 
veiled attempt to increase state authority over the family in the name of protecting 
the state's investment in children. Home visits by government agents will be 
required in a world government. Ultimately, human births may only occur through 
artificial means, when the state gives permission. 

The Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, The World Research Institute, Re- 
sources for the Future, and the WorldWatch Institute, led by members of the CFR, 



34 Treason The New World Order 



donate large sums to support population control and ecology groups. Under CFR 
member Adele Simmons, the MacArthur Foundation leads the way in donations to 
these groups. Over the years, these foundations have issued many reports calling 
for central planning and world government to save the environment. For instance, 
CFR member Lester R. Brown, head of the WorldWatch Institute declared, in 
World Without Borders, that a world environmental agency was needed because 
protecting the environment was not "possible within the existing framework of 
independent nation-states." He called for developing "supranational institutions" to 
create a world government. Many environmental organizations have little interest 
in protecting the environment; they have been subverted to support the corporate 
agenda. These groups have even covered up Clinton's strong anti-environment 
policy. ! " 

Laurance Rockefeller, in The Reader's Digest, warned that humanity must 
follow a simpler path, more in tune with the environment, or "authoritarian 
controls" may be used." Barbara Marx Hubbard, supported by Rockefeller's Fund 
for Enhancement of the Human Spirit, wrote The Revelation: A Message of Hope 
for the New Millennium. She said humanity may chose a "gentle path" surrender- 
ing rule to an elite, but a sharp reduction of the world's population was necessary, 
which may require a "violent path." In the early 1980s, some of this material was 
distributed privately but was not publicly published, because the corporate 
controllers don't want the public to learn what is coming. Hubbard said: "Out of 
the full spectrum of human personality. ..one-fourth is destructive. ...They are 
defective seeds. ...In the past they were permitted to die a 'natural death.'..." Now 
"the elders" have decided that "the destructive one-fourth must be eliminated from 
the social body" in order to save everyone else. "Fortunately, you. ..are not 
responsible for this act. We are. We are in charge of God's selection process for 
planet Earth. He selects, we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, 
Death... .We come to bring death. ...The riders of the pale horse are about to pass 
among you. Grim reapers, they will separate the wheat from the chaff. This is the 
most painful period in the history of humanity.'" 1 ' Population and environment 
concerns are considered a valid excuse for the elite to ultimately seize control, act 
like Gods, and kill huge numbers of people. 

I do not fully agree with those who attack the entire environmental move- 
ment. There are serious environmental concerns that should be dealt with, but it is 
also essential to respect people and private property. There must be a spirit of 
compromise to solve real environmental problems. The millions of people 
involved in the environment movement have no understanding or interest in 
promoting world government. Most people in the environmental movement don't 
understand the new world order. Environment and overpopulation concerns have 
been manipulated by key environmental leaders who use the media to shape the 
environmental agenda and increase government control over the people. People in 
the wise use movement should understand that large corporations supporting this 
movement are often closely allied to the corporate elite promoting the new world 
order, and the corporations usually support both sides to manipulate events. 
Covert Action provided an excellent article on this involvement by the transna- 
tional corporations and Trilateral Commission." 

Another constant theme raised in the rantings of those promoting the new 
world order is to use technology and economic power to achieve social engineer- 
ing. A typical book is Changing Images of Man, edited by Markley and Harmon. 



The New World Order 35 



The authors said there must be important changes in industrial man and industrial 
society if we are to survive. To deal with the growing scarcity of resources such as 
food and the population explosion, various methods of social control are explored. 
Zbigniew Brzezinski, in Between Two Ages, described a shift from an industrial to 
a technetronic society shaped by the impact of technology and electronics. "Both 
the growing capacity for the instant calculation of the most complex interactions 
and the increasing availability of biochemical means of human control augment 
the potential scope of consciously chosen direction, and thereby also the pressures 
to direct, to choose, and to change." This new society will "give rise to difficult 
problems in determining the legitimate scope of social control. The possibility of 
extensive chemical mind control, the danger of loss of individuality inherent in 
extensive transplantation, the feasibility of manipulating the genetic structure will 
call for the social definition of common criteria of use and restraint."" 

World War II was seen as a great opportunity to move towards world govern- 
ment. The CFR formed study groups and started working directly with the State 
Department in 1939, to work for world peace and union after the war. Clarence K. 
Streit formed the Federal Union in 1940 to promote world government. Supported 
by prominent people like John Foster Dulles, a founder of the CFR and later 
Secretary of State, it placed ads in major newspapers on January 5, 1942 urging 
Congress to support union with certain foreign governments. This new union 
would directly tax people, control all armed forces, and make and enforce all laws. 
Streit wrote Union Now, Union Now With Britain, and in 1961, Freedom's 
Frontier Atlantic Union Now calling for world government. 

In 1942, Dulles while chairman of the Federal Council of Churches 
Commission, issued a report calling for "a world government, strong immediate 
limitation on national sovereignty, international control of all armies and navies, a 
universal system of money, world-wide freedom of immigration, progressive 
elimination of all tariff and quota restrictions on world trade and a democratically- 
controlled world bank." The report said "a new order of economic life is both 
imminent and imperative.'"' In 1946 Dulles, in a Federal Council of Churches 
Report, said changes in the U.S. and the Soviet Union would make it possible to 
merge the two systems into a world government." 

After the UN was formed, the United World Federalists (UWF) got 27 state 
legislatures to pass resolutions supporting a constitutional convention to change 
the U.S. Constitution to join a world government, but voters got most of these 
resolutions repealed. Recently, the North Carolina general assembly rescinded, by 
a 92-11 vote a 1941 resolution supporting participation in a "Federation of the 
World," a "new world order," and an international convention to create a world 
Constitution. 

In 1954 Rowan Gaither, head of the Ford Foundation, told Norman Dodd, a 
senator on the Reese Committee: "We operate here under directives which emulate 
from the White House. The substance of the directives under which we operate are 
that we shall use our grant making power to alter life in the U.S. so that we can 
comfortably be merged with the Soviet Union." On December 4, 1985, World 
Federalist Association (WFA) vice-president John Logue told a subcommittee of 
the House Foreign Affairs Committee: "It is time to tell the world's people not 
what they want to hear but what they must hear. What they ought to hear is that if 
we really want to have peace and promote justice, we must. ..strengthen the 



36 Treason The New World Order 



UN. ...The UN must have taxing power. ...It must have a large peacekeeping 
force. ...It must be able to make and enforce law on the individual."" 

Over the years, especially after World War II, many in Congress worked to 
surrender U.S. sovereignty to a world government, while others harshly attacked 
such proposals. In 1947, Rep. Richard Nixon introduced a world government 
resolution, and he wanted a UN police force. In June, 1952 the Senate held a 
hearing on the push for world government and global citizenship. On July 10, 
1952 Congress passed what became Public Law 495, Section 112 which said: 
"None of the funds appropriated in this title (Department of State Appropriation 
Act, 1953) shall be used. ..to pay the U.S. contribution to any international 
organization which engages in the direct or indirect promotion of the principles or 
doctrine of one world government or one world citizenship." This law remained in 
effect until it was deleted in 1987. Obviously Congress is not filled with racists, 
anti-Semites, or conspiracy nuts. 

In 1949, about 40 senators and 105 representatives introduced the Atlantic 
Union Resolution which called for a convention to strengthen the UN and estab- 
lish a world government. For 10 years, this resolution was continually introduced, 
and one can read the Congressional Record to see the bitter debates on this topic. 
The Atlantic Union Committee included many CFR members, while Rockefeller 
provided rent free space for its headquarters. Its first head, former Supreme Court 
Justice Owen J. Roberts, said national sovereignty was a "silly shibboleth." Back 
in 1943, in the May 2 issue of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Roberts said: "An 
international government, with police power over every individual citizen in the 
nations belonging to it. ..is the only way...." In a change of strategy, the NATO 
Citizens Commission Law was passed in 1960. Later, pushed by the World 
Affairs Council on January 30, 1976, 124 members of Congress signed a 
Declaration of Interdependence: "Two centuries ago our forefather brought forth a 
new nation; now we must join with others to bring forth a New World Order...." 

Those promoting the new world order are now trying to influence more 
people. In Time, July 20, 1992, Strobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of State, CFR 
and TC member, and Clinton's roommate at Oxford, said in the next century 
"nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, 
global authority. ...National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all." He said 
that GATT and IMF are the future world government's "protoministries of trade, 
finance and development for a united world.'"" This senior government official 
wants to surrender U.S. sovereignty to a world government. Read this two-page 
article and you may appreciate how dangerous things are. In response to this 
article, Clinton wrote to the WFA expressing his congratulations. He said: 
"Norman Cousins (past head of the WFA) worked for world peace and world 
government. ...Best wishes for an enjoyable reception and for future success." 

The November, 1994 issue of The Rotarian had an editorial calling for world 
government." The March/April, 1995 issue of Sojourners magazine had an ad 
promoting world government, and Harper's magazine had a full page ad promoting 
world government in its January, 1995 issue. This ad was promoted by a group 
that has a world Constitution ready to replace our current Constitution. 

The Western corporate elite have long worked closely with the communists to 
promote world government. In 1916 Lenin said: "The aim of socialism is not only 
to abolish the present division of mankind into small states and all-national 
isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other, but also to merge 



The New World Order 37 



them." In 1936 the Communist International formally described three stages for 
achieving world government. Speaking in Missouri in May, 1992, Gorbachev 
said: "This is a turning point on a historic and worldwide scale and signifies the 
incipient substitution of one paradigm of civilization for another.. ..An awareness 
of the need for some kind of global government is gaining ground, one in which 
all the members of the world community would take part. ...Many countries are 
morbidly jealous of their sovereignty, and. ..of their national independence and 
identity. ...Here the decisive role may and must be played by the UN. ...The new 
world order will not be fully realized unless the UN and its Security Council create 
structures... authorized to impose sanctions and make use of other means of com- 
pulsion. All members of the UN must recognize the acceptability of international 
interference (in a nations internal affairs).... Under certain circumstances it will be 
desirable to put certain national armed forces at the disposal of the Security 
Council, making them subordinate to the UN military command." 

In 1993 Gorbachev said: "This has been a period of international transition." 
He spoke about the need for "international institutions acting on behalf of 
all. ...Clinton will be a success if he manages to use American influence to 
accomplish this transformation of international responsibility and increase signifi- 
cantly the role of the UN." While many feel this would limit U.S. independence 
"accepting the aegis of a higher institution that operates on a consensus such as 
the UN, would have many advantages. ...Clinton. ..will be a great president — if he 
can make America the creator of a new world order."" 

In late September, 1995, Gorbachev and his foundation hosted a world forum 
in San Francisco to promote a new world order and a council of wise men to solve 
the worlds problems. Jim Garrison, head of the Gorbachev Foundation, told the 
San Francisco Weekly in the May 31-June 6, 1995 edition that the ultimate 
purpose of the meeting was to shape the "next phase of human develop- 
ment. ...Over the next twenty to thirty years, we are going to end up with world 
government. It's inevitable." Zbigniew Brzezinski said: "Finally, I have no 
illusions about world government emerging in our lifetime.... We cannot leap into 
world government through one quick step. ...The precondition for eventual and 
genuine globalization is progressive regionalization because by that we move 
towards larger, more stable, more cooperative units." Sam Keen declared that if the 
world population was cut 90 percent this would protect the ecology. 

Many corporations and foundations like UPS, United Airlines, and Archer- 
Daniels financed and participated in this gathering, because they support the new 
world order. They feel that free trade will increase profits, and the Constitution 
doesn't show up in the balance sheet. In many ways, the large corporations are 
working to increase federal government power and tighten control over the people. 
Many people in government and the large corporations feel that world government 
is inevitable, so they support it. Norman Cousins wrote in 1985 in Human 
Events, "World government is coming, in fact, it is inevitable. No arguments for 
or against it can change that fact." Cousins was head of the WFA and Chairman of 
Planetary Citizen. The debate to have a world government was concluded decades 
ago, although most Americans were not allowed to take part in this discussion. 

In 1984, in New Lies For Old, Anatoliy Golitsyn, an ex-KGB officer and 
defector, described the coming collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberalization 
policy, which he called a phony deception to mislead the West. He said the West 
has generally understood the communist military threat, but not its political 



38 Treason The New World Order 



threat. He said the coming collapse of the Soviet Union was part of a long-range 
disinformation campaign to fulfill long-range communist goals for world domina- 
tion. By the end of 1993, 139 out of 148 of his predictions had been fulfilled for a 
94 percent accuracy rate, while 46 predictions were yet to be fulfilled." 

Golitsyn is not psychic; he just leaked plans that have existed between the 
East and West for decades. Some communists, like Gorbachev, actually support 
working with Wall Street to create a world government. As long as working with 
the corporate elite brings Russia and China money, technology, and trade, most 
communists will support having a one world government someday, but they will 
never actually surrender their sovereignty unless they are in control. The cold war 
is over, but the communist threat remains. In the future, it will be a wolf in new 
clothes. They are playing the corporate elite for fools, and as with General Butler 
in the 1930s, the corporate elite stupidly think they can bribe everyone to accom- 
plish whatever treason they want. The CFR does not control Russia and China to 
the degree that they think. In 1994 in Soil, Tied to Our Blood, Gennadi Zyuganov, 
head of the Russian communist party, said: "We (Russians) are the last power on 
this planet that is capable of mounting a challenge to the New World Order — the 
global cosmopolitan dictatorship. We must work against our. ..destroyers, using 
means as carefully thought-out and as goal-orientated as theirs are." Reportedly, 
Russian nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, said on November 9, 1994, at the UN: 
"There has long been a hidden agenda to merge America and Russia under the new 
world order." 

Over the years, many have attacked the new world order. In The Open 
Conspiracy, Blue Prints For A World Revolution, H.G. Wells called for world 
government. G.K. Chesterton analyzed this work and said "Internationalism is in 
any case hostile to democracy. ...The only purely popular government is local, and 
founded on local knowledge. ..To make all politics cosmopolitan is to create an 
aristocracy of globe-trotters.""' Ralph Nader testified before a House subcommittee 
that GATT "formalized a world economic government dominated by giant corp- 
orations, without a correlative democratic rule of law to hold this economic 
government accountable."* 

On June 26, 1995, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher spoke at 
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. She attacked the new world order 
and defended state sovereignty, warning against turning British rule over "to 
European institutions and non-elected bureaucracies." She was also against trans- 
ferring the power of British courts to a European court. She said the agenda of 
European federalists would damage U.S. interests, and she was very critical of the 
attacks on national sovereignty that have become so common in the "forced 
internationalism." At the Gorbachev conference, Thatcher warned, "Do not use the 
UN for something for which it was not founded. We cannot put executive 
decisions into its hands." These views explain why she was removed from office. 

The Catholic Church and the Pope understand what is coming. As an arch- 
bishop in 1976 the Pope said: "We are standing in the face of the greatest 
historical confrontation humanity has gone through. ..a test of 2000 years of 
culture and Christian civilization. ...Wide circles of American society and wide 
circles of the Christian community do not realize this fully...." 42 In The Keys of 
This Blood, Malachi Martin, with a decidedly Catholic Church influence, described 
how certain elite groups are striving towards global unity and world domination in 
a one world government. He identified certain groups involved, such as the inter- 



The New World Order 39 



nationalists — political bureaucrats that focus on agreements between nations and 
unity through politics, and transnationalists — business men who use cash to 
achieve their goals of increased international trade. Reportedly, some elements of 
the Catholic Church are quietly working to stop the coming world dictatorship, 
while others support it, determined to preserve a strong position for the Catholic 
Church. 

A clue to what is coming was revealed in 1967, when Report From Iron 
Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace was published. Some 15 
Americans from various fields took over two years to do this think-tank study for 
the government. It was never supposed to be published, which is understandable 
when one reads it. Translated into 15 languages, it was on the best seller list, so 
naturally its validity was denied, because it revealed so much about the coming 
terror. When you plan to destroy a society, it is not wise to acknowledge this. I 
read five reviews of this book, with the best one in the March, 1968 Bulletin of 
the Atomic Scientists. It admitted the report might be false, but then explained 
why it might be true. The report was written when ending the cold war was 
considered possible and when there were many private government studies. In 
November, 1967, the president of Dial Press, the publisher, defended the book's 
authenticity in the New York Times, while John K. Galbraith, in a review, 
defended its authenticity admitting he was asked to be part of the study group. 
Reportedly, the report was leaked by a guilt-ridden participant to Leonard C. 
Lewin. In 1972, Lewin, who wrote the book's introduction, claimed that he wrote 
the book, and it was a satirical attack on the military." Simon & Schuster recently 
republished this book. 

According to this report, the war system has worked quite well and peace is 
not desirable, because there would be many problems converting from a war 
economy. Poverty is necessary and desirable, while the war system must continue 
until new institutions can be developed to maintain social stability and political 
control. War is also supposedly a necessary means of population control, because 
disease no longer sufficiently reduces the population. Undesirable genetic traits 
were self-liquidating but now continue because of medical advances, so new 
methods of eugenics are needed. Most medical advances were considered a problem 
and birth-control drugs might be added to food and water to limit population 
growth. Teams of experimental biologists in the U.S., Mexico, and the USSR 
were working to create life to make it much easier to limit population growth. 4 * A 
world without war must ultimately turn to universal test-tube procreation to limit 
population growth. In 1968 Brzezinski wrote of genetic manipulation to maintain 
social control and "the creation of beings" that will function and reason like men. 45 
George Bernard Shaw said: "If you want better people you must breed them as 
carefully as you breed thoroughbred horses and pedigree boars."" 

Without war, new institutions and alternate enemies must be created to 
maintain control. Many substitutes for war were considered but each had serious 
limitations. Space research and an outer space UFO menace were deemed to not be 
sufficiently credible. It would be difficult to deliberately damage the environment 
so that nations would surrender their sovereignty. A credible substitute for war 
must create an omnipresent and readily understood fear of personal destruction, and 
this fear must be sufficient to ensure adherence to society's values. The report 
suggested "the reintroduction... consistent with modern technology and political 



40 Treason The New World Order 



processes, of slavery." Noting the works of Wells, Huxley, and Orwell, the report 
said that slavery might be essential in the future to maintain social control. 

The book concluded that war is a good excuse to control and expand the 
economy, control antisocial tendencies, establish standards for the arts, provide 
motivation for scientific and technological progress, and help maintain political 
authority, class distinctions, and ecological balance between the population and 
raw materials necessary for survival. War helps maintain a stable government "by 
providing an external necessity for a society to accept political rule." Bertrand 
Russell, in The Impact of Science on Society, said: "War has been throughout 
history, the chief source of social cohesion...." This is the sick mentality of the 
secret government. This vile report has to be read to be believed. 

There are many who call the new world order socialist or communist. Cer- 
tainly there are leftist elements in these groups, but there is also a strong neo-Nazi 
faction in the corporate elite. In the 1930s, the corporate elite used fascist ideas to 
promote a police state; in more recent years, they turned to communist principles. 
In truth, the philosophical views of these people is not the key issue. Their 
common ideology is an unrelenting lust for money, power, and control. Any 
ideology is acceptable towards that end. Barry Goldwater correctly said of the CFR 
and other elitist groups: "They have no ideological anchors. In their pursuit of a 
new world order they are prepared to deal without prejudice with a communist 
state, a socialist state, a democratic state, monarchy, oligarchy — it's all the same 
to them." 4 ' 

People who attack the view that there is a conspiracy involving the wealthy 
and powerful to achieve world government are attacked for presenting a conspiracy 
view of history. This is done partly because critics are unable to refute these 
claims. When the message cannot be refuted, the messenger is attacked. "One of 
the things we most need to understand — and one of the things historians most 
often fail to discuss — are the precise means by which the dominant class and those 
who serve it go about accomplishing their goals in politics."*" Michael Parenti 
said: "It should be noted that there are conspiracies among ruling groups, things 
done in secrecy with the intent to sustain or extend power — as Watergate, the 
Pentagon Papers, the FBI's COINTELPRO campaign against the left, and the 
CIA's daily doings have demonstrated." 4 " Thomas Jefferson warned: "Single acts of 
tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day, but a scries of 
oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, unalterable through every change of 
ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematical plan of reducing us to 
slavery." 

At the same time, William Cooper has a point in saying there isn't a 
conspiracy, because so much is published about the coming new world order. The 
move towards world government involves the quiet networking of thousands of 
individuals. If there is a conspiracy to establish a one world government, it is an 
open one. Remember the title of H.G. Well's book, The Open Conspiracy, Blue 
Prints For A World Revolution. The corporate elite reveal much about their plans, 
because they look at the people with contempt and they have had their way for 
many years. President Nixon told the New York Times on November 10, 1972: 
"The average American is just like the child in the family." Averell Harriman said 
the American people wanted nothing better than to "go to the movies and drink 
Coke." In 1996, Ted Turner, head of CNN, said before an international forum: 
"The U.S. has got some of the dumbest people in the world. I want you to know 



The New World Order 41 



that. We know that.""' These elitists are too blinded by their arrogance to under- 
stand just how angry and educated more and more Americans are becoming. 

The elites have traditionally had an extremely negative attitude towards the 
people they ruled and have always had problems accepting the involvement of the 
people in government. Charles Lasch, in The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal 
of Democracy, said the elites "regard the masses with mingled scorn and apprehen- 
sion." Jose Ortega y Gasset, in The Revolt of the Masses, said the masses cannot 
rule and their involvement in government has created a grave crisis. Walter 
Lippmann said the "omnicompetent citizen" was no longer possible in the age of 
specialization. He believed public opinion was no better than gossip and that real 
governing should be left in the hands of experts. 

While many dismiss the view of a corporate elite creating a one world gov- 
ernment as left or right wing extremisms, the reality is that the new world order is 
increasingly here. While most people ignore the motives behind the coming one 
world government, and some debate whether or not such a government is coming 
and if there is a conspiracy, the new world order is unfolding before our eyes. You 
don't have to believe what I and others write; study the literature noted above and 
the laws passed by Congress and other governments. 

Stopping the corporate traitors from establishing a world dictatorship is the 
foremost issue of our time. Many of the concerns people have today from labor 
rights, to ending abortions, to having a balanced budget however important these 
issues are will be irrelevant if we live in a police state. Many conflicts in our 
society have been deliberately created to divert the people's attention so the 
corporate elite can quietly and gradually shift this Republic into a world dictator- 
ship. However, with many people awakening to these plans and a freer flow of 
information, I believe the one world government dictatorship will never occur. In 
the end, the new world order crowd will join Hitler's Third Reich in the ash heap 
of history. 



43 



Chapter V 
Fooling the People 



"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion." 

Edmund Burke 

"Political language. ..is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder 
respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. ...The first step in 
liquidating a people is to erase its memory." 

George Orwell 



There are many reasons why most people do not understand that our rights are 
being lost. People think we have a democracy with the people in charge, because 
this is what the controlled national media tells us. Certain agencies like the CIA 
use public relations firms, authors, and journalists to fool the public and to 
perform roles the government cannot legally do.' In the 1970s it was revealed that 
the CIA had hired hundreds of journalists to shape public opinion.' It would be 
extremely naive to not appreciate that such disinformation continues to manipulate 
and confuse the people. 

This propaganda along with various mind control techniques over the years 
created a paradigm as described by the philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn in The 
Structure of Scientific Revolutions. A paradigm represents a model or shared 
beliefs of the way the world works for most people. Theories help create facts, and 
people who exist inside a paradigm are quite comfortable with the facts they are 
told. People who present information outside the existing paradigm are initially 
called silly, but gradually as different views become a threat to the status quo, 
people with new ideas are demonized as crazy, extremist, or racist. Conflicting 
paradigms are sharply resisted. 

This helps explain why almost no one in the Western intelligence community 
foresaw the collapse of the Soviet Union. Everyone believed this would never 
happen so the possibility was ignored by all but a few people, like Senator 
Moynihan. One intelligence officer said in the late 1980s he would have been put 
in a mental hospital if he had said the Soviet Union was soon going to collapse. 
Despite growing contrary evidence inside the paradigm everyone felt the Soviet 
Union remained a powerful and dangerous enemy. Other evidence was ignored or 
disbelieved.' 

A crisis may cause the formation of a new paradigm as many people work to 
reconstruct society with new institutions. Then society is divided into separate 
factions, one defending the old paradigm, while the other group seeks to establish 
new ideas and institutions. Once this happens normal political interaction may 
fail, and serious conflict is possible. Political revolutions may occur when groups 
in the population realize that existing institutions have ceased to properly meet the 



44 Treason The New World Order 



needs of the people. Then the question is, can the new paradigm solve the 
problems that created a crisis in the old paradigm? 4 Millions remain in a state of 
denial today, thinking all is well, while the Patriot movement is getting stronger 
partly because many people have broken out of the corporate managed paradigm of 
America. 

Previously propaganda and controlled elections were sufficient to control the 
people. Now, along with controlling the media and subverting society, a key part 
of the strategy of the secret government is to keep the people distracted with issues 
that will not interfere with their goal of establishing tighter control and a one 
world government. This is done by using various propaganda techniques to redirect 
the people's actions. Emotional debates and conflicts are created so many people 
are too busy to notice what is happening to our constitutional rights. The object 
is to keep the people stupid and ignorant, watching television and sports or other 
amusements diverting attention and keeping people from organizing. In certain 
respects our country is like the Roman Empire in its dying days. Then citizens 
watched people being eaten by lions; today, we are fed hundreds of stories 
involving crime, sex, and sports. Eduardo Galeano said "The majority must resign 
itself to the consumption of fantasy. Illusions of wealth are sold to the poor, 
illusions of freedom to the oppressed,. ..dreams of victory to the defeated and of 
power to the weak." Arthur Miller in Democratic Dictatorship called this process 
the tyranny of technology. Franz Neumann said: "The higher the state of 
technological development, the greater the concentration of political power." 
People will be made to enjoy their enslavement. 

A classic example of this strategy is the abortion debate. America is the only 
nation where the abortion issue is such an intense focus for many. In no other 
country, even where the Catholic church is much stronger, is there such an intense 
abortion debate. The secret government often places provocateurs on opposing 
sides of an issue to arouse the people. Whether the issue is child abuse, racial 
tension, the environment, capital punishment, affirmative action, or women's 
right, there are many intensely debated issues in our society where this quiet 
manipulation proceeds. I do not question the sincere beliefs that people have 
regarding abortion and these other issues, but it is also obvious that millions of 
people are so involved in these debates that they have little time to examine what 
is happening to our Constitution and the government. I also do not claim that the 
secret government is at work in every issue debated in our society, but at times 
this is a key hidden factor. 

The corporate elite will sometimes set up front groups that supposedly 
support a cause while they work to weaken the entire movement. Money is 
donated and provocateurs are planted in various groups the secret government 
wants to control. A classical example of this is corporate infiltration of the 
environmental movement. Large corporations and foundations support certain 
environmental groups like the Wilderness Society. The David and Lucile Packard 
Foundation supports the Wilderness Society, which never challenged Hewlett- 
Packard's poor land management in the Challis National Forest. One member of 
the board of the Wilderness Society is Walter Minnick C.E.O. of a multinational 
timber company, T J International, which is partly owned and allied with other 
timber companies that are constantly cutting timber with little regard for the 
environment. 



Fooling the People 45 



An obvious diversion for many years was the communist threat. The result 
was and is that anything could be done to justify the national security state. 
Historically, after each war America substantially dismantled the military and 
related industries that supported it, but this did not occur after World War II and the 
cold war. Some try to justify continuing the defense/security apparatus by 
speaking of nuclear proliferation, militias, war on drugs, and third world terrorism, 
or by using the military for national emergencies to stay on a permanent war 
footing. On the CBS Evening News, March 19, 1995, there was a report on 
growing Muslim fundamentalism and its threat to the U.S. Senator John Glenn 
and the NATO Secretary General described Islamic fundamentalism as even more 
dangerous than communism. At least one reporter called this "absurd" and 
suggested that NATO needed a new threat to justify its existence.' 

Bertram Gross, in Friendly Fascism, said technology and corporate central 
government power were gradually shifting the U.S. towards totalitarianism. 
Buttressed by constitutional restraints and splits among the elites, he felt that 
fascism would come gradually through silent encroachments, and the great danger 
would be that this slow process would be unnoticed by most Americans. It is 
essential to preserve the facade of democracy while gradually shifting to a police 
state. The goal is to "accustom the American people to the destruction of their 
freedoms." By the time people realize what is happening it could be too late. In 
America, fascism will come from "powerful tendencies within the Establishment," 
not from the right or left. The American model of fascism will be "pluralistic in 
nature" with "no charismatic dictator, no one-party rule, no mass fascist party, no 
glorification of the state, no dissolution of legislatures, no discontinuation of 
elections...." William Shirer, author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, said 
America may be the first country in which fascism takes power through 
democratic elections. 

The forces that have prevented friendly fascism from developing, such as 
strong labor unions and a free press, have been subverted by the large corporations. 
Many labor leaders have become bureaucrats unable to represent their members. 
Through "mind management and sophisticated repression" incentives, punish- 
ments, and escape valves are provided to pave the way for friendly fascism. Wide- 
spread diversions such as sex, drugs, cults, mental illness, and sports are used to 
control people, so they will accept servitude and not oppose government policies. 
The "soma pills" described by Aldous Huxley, in Brave New World, have arrived. 

In Brave New World, Aldous Huxley said the especially efficient totalitarian 
state would be one in which the political bosses and managers control a 
population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their 
servitude. To make people love their slavery is the task today assigned to 
totalitarian states. We accept our bondage partly because we don't even realize that 
we have become enslaved by the addiction of television and other forms of modern- 
day propaganda. To become free, we must first recognize our entrapment. 

A major strategy to delude the people is to transform the country gradually 
into a dictatorship, not upsetting the people. CFR member Henry Morgenthau, 
who was FDR's Secretary of the Treasury, said: "We can hardly expect the nation- 
state to make itself superfluous, at least not overnight. ...The transition will not be 
dramatic, but a gradual one." CFR member Philip C. Jessup, in The International 
Problems of Governing Mankind, said: "I agree that national sovereignty is the 
root of the evil. ...The question of procedure remains. Can the root be pulled up by 



46 Treason The New World Order 



one mighty revolutionary heave, or should it first be loosened by digging around it 
and cutting the rootlets one by one?" The Fabian Socialist H.G. Wells said 
Roosevelt's New Deal was "the most effective instrument possible for the coming 
of the new world order.... He is continuously revolutionary in the new way without 
ever provoking a stark revolutionary crisis." 

In 1955 Milton Mayer wrote a remarkable book, They Thought They Were 
Free. Ten dedicated Nazis, people from the middle class, for example a policeman 
and cabinetmaker, were interviewed to explain how Hitler took control. People 
should study this book especially the chapter entitled "But Then It Was Too Late" 
to understand how the tactic of gradualism can transform a free people to slavery. 
Daniel Webster cautioned: "If this Constitution be picked away by piecemeal, it is 
gone as effectively as if a military despot had grasped it, trampled it underfoot and 
scattered it to the winds." 

An important strategy the secret government uses to maintain control is to 
support ambitious people early in their careers. People are promoted if they have 
demonstrated intelligence, ambition, leadership, and few morals. These people are 
corrupted though sex, money, and drugs with evidence of criminality gathered to 
blackmail them, if necessary. They must follow orders, or their careers will be 
ruined and they may go to jail. This principle is applied to many politicians, but 
is applied with special care to senior officials, like presidents. Once the invisible 
government chooses someone to become president, the instruments of corporate 
power distort the news to protect the chosen one. The people are only allowed to 
participate by voting, which is why many no longer bother. Who will win is 
decided long before election day. The CFR and TC don't care which party elects the 
president, as long as they control each candidate and the people continue to be 
fooled. This system guarantees a corrupt leadership and a disillusioned populace. 

In FDR, My Exploited Father-In-Law, C.B. Dall said: "Politics is the gentle 
art of having to pretend to be something that you know you are not, for vote- 
catching purposes, while being aided by our press. ...Usually, carefully screened 
leading 'actors' are picked well in advance of election day by a small group, picked 
for both major parties, thereby reducing the promotional risk to just about 
zero. ...It is desirable for such a candidate to have great personal ambition and, 
perchance, to be vulnerable to blackmail for some past occurrences; hence, 
someone not apt to become too independent in time, but always amenable to 
'suggestions' on the policy level." Colonel House, the chief aide to Woodrow 
Wilson, knew that, along with great personal ambition, Wilson was vulnerable to 
blackmail. Dall said Wilson appointed Brandeis to the Supreme Court because he 
was being blackmailed and couldn't obtain $250,000 to get back certain letters." 

While President, Eisenhower made a speech at a park Bernard Baruch had 
founded. He said: "Twenty-five years ago as a young and unknown major I took 
the wisest step in my life — I consulted Mr. Baruch." When the war started 
Eisenhower was promoted over at least 150 senior officers to head the allied war 
effort in Europe. For many years Baruch protected the interests of Wall Street in 
Washington.' 

In 1969 Alexander Haig was a colonel, but within several years he became a 
senior White House aide and later head of NATO, because he hitched his career to 
Henry Kissinger. Colin Powell and Jimmy Carter were promoted by the CFR 
beginning in the early 1970s. Lamar Alexander turned one dollar into $620,000. 
Even Hillary Clinton couldn't match such corruption. General John M. 



Fooling the People 47 



Shalikashvili was advanced over many officers to become chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff. Hillary Clinton's commodities trade was an obvious set-up. The 
massive corruption of Clinton is clear to many as are his drug and sexual 
appetites. 

On November 18, 1993 in The Wanderer, a national newspaper, James K. 
Fitzpatrick a prominent journalist revealed that while he has never believed in 
stories of a secret government or the Illuminati, Clinton's support of NAFTA 
made him wonder, especially because of statements made by Clinton. During his 
acceptance speech when nominated by the Democrats, Clinton spoke about the 
influence his old professor Carrol Quigley, author of Tragedy and Hope, had on his 
life. After his election Clinton told reporters how Quigley had spoken and written 
about a secret shadow government of powerful businessmen and bankers who 
controlled our political agenda. Clinton said, while a student, he decided to work 
with this secret group to enhance his political career. Fitzpatrick, not under- 
standing how controlled our news is, was shocked that this interview wasn't 
discussed in the media. That this technique of controlling our leaders has long 
existed helps explain why attention should be directed to stop the corporate leaders. 
The politicians are just agents who can easily be replaced. 

In recent years, the growing use of computerized vote machines has provided 
new opportunities to control elections. There have been dozens of instances of 
vote fraud throughout the country such as in Florida, Wisconsin, and California; 
and sometimes judges throw out election results. The growing problems with 
these machines is being documented by Computer Professionals for Social Re- 
sponsibility in Palo Alto, Election Watch in Pacific Palisades, California, and 
Cincinnatus in Cincinnati. Even the national media, including the New York 
Times and Wall Street Journal, have discussed the dangers of computerized voting 
machines." On November 7, 1988 the New Yorker had a 23 page report on the 
dangers of computerized voting machines. Science News explained how modern 
vote machines help steal elections.* Amazingly, when vote results are challenged 
the computer programs usually aren't analyzed because the manufacturers have 
successfully claimed they are proprietary. Private corporations increasingly own 
our elections. Computer scientist Peter G. Neumann, in Computer-Related Risks, 
said: "The opportunities for rigging elections (are) childs play for vendors and 
knowledgeable election officials." In the 1988 New Hampshire primary, Dole won 
the precincts that used paper ballots while Bush won the computerized ones. 

Even more threatening is the fact that, in many states, election results are 
reported to the New York City based News Election Service (NES), a private 
company owned by ABC, CBS, NBC, and the Associated Press (AP). The book 
Votescam: The Stealing of America documents the dangers of this operation. 10 
There is no system to challenge the announced results. For instance, each caucus 
in the Iowa primary reports the results to the NES. In Dubuque County, Iowa, 
Buchanan got 870 votes, but the next day the Cedar Rapids Gazette quoted the AP 
saying Buchanan got 757 votes and Dole's total was increased. When people 
complained, they were told there could be no final count until April. Numerous 
other instances of suspicious behavior occurred, and Buchanan may have been 
cheated out of victory in Iowa, Arizona, and South Carolina. This is why 
thousands came to see Buchanan, while only a few voters came to see Dole. It is 
rather suspicious that Buchanan refused to complain about this. 



48 Treason The New World Order 



The most dangerous scam used against the people are presidential edicts. 
Every president has issued orders and directives which are often called Executive 
Orders (EO); however, in the 20th century the use, scope, and authority of EOs 
greatly increased. These edicts have the force and effect of law; however, there is 
no constitutional basis for a president to make laws. Congress should make the 
law and the president should administer and enforce it. There is much room for 
abuse of presidential power with these edicts. Nowhere does the Constitution say 
that a president can issue an EO, nor do any federal statutes exist defining the 
purpose or permissible subject matter of EOs. 

Previously, most EOs dealt with routine administrative issues such as land 
use and civil service regulations. EOs now exist for the Feds to seize all 
communications (EO 10995), to takeover all food supplies and farms (EO 10998), 
to control all transportation (EO 10999), to force all civilians into work brigades 
(slave labor) (EO 11000), to takeover all health and education activities (EO 
11001), and for the post office to register everyone (EO 11002). These and other 
EOs have been combined into EO 11490, which Carter signed in 1979. This is a 
dictatorship in waiting. One can only image the horrors of the secret EOs that 
have never been published or leaked. 

The greatest abuse of presidential authority lies in presidents declaring a 
national emergency and martial law. Presidents have already signed EOs declaring 
national emergencies because of events in the Middle East, Yugoslavia, South 
Africa, Kuwait, and chemical/biological problems. How these events require a 
national emergency in the U.S. defies reality. In 1985 the New York Times asked 
why there had to be a national emergency in the U.S. over South Africa." Having 
a national emergency with a weakened Constitution has become the norm to 
gradually get people used to the conditions of a police state. 

EO 9066 issued February 19, 1942 by President Roosevelt caused the 
internment of 120,000 Japanese Americans in glorified concentration camps. 
Along with being imprisoned for several years, these people, 75,000 of whom 
were American citizens, lost most of their assets. For this to happen just because 
a president signed one piece of paper shows how dangerous things are. If a phony 
emergency is declared, Clinton could then call for the surrender of all arms and the 
arrest of his political opponents who would be called a threat to national security. 
Passing especially dangerous EOs started March 9, 1933 when Roosevelt 
weakened the Constitution by declaring a national emergency that put us into a 
state of war. 12 On June 17, 1995 the Texas Republican party issued Resolution 5 
calling for a return to constitutional government and an end to Roosevelt's 
emergency rule and weakening of the Constitution. The press responded with a 
resounding silence. 

Recent EOs have become absurd. On October 21, 1994 Clinton issued an EO 
requiring schools to expel students who bring a gun to school. Such students 
should receive serious punishment, but Clinton has no constitutional authority to 
decided how schools deal with local problems. Clinton is only the president. 
Clinton's speech announcing this policy received wide publicity yet no one in the 
media complained about this abuse of power. Must we now get used to a president 
announcing new laws on the most minute details of our lives. Just after the 
November, 1994 elections, The Washington Post reported that Clinton and his 
staff planned to govern more with executive orders and regulations." Clinton was 
elected president, not king or dictator. 



Fooling the People 49 



When Rep. Jack Brooks in March, 1987 asked presidential aide Frank Carlucci 
to provide a list of all presidential edicts issued since 1981 he refused to comply. 
Speaker of the House Jim Wright said: "Congress cannot react responsibly to new 
dictates for national policy set in operation by the executive branch behind closed 
doors." Presidential edicts are often classified with no one in Congress even aware 
of their subject matter. 

Control by Congress over executive rule making has been replaced by a 
powerful executive branch which is destroying the checks and balances designed by 
the Constitution. In Myers v. U.S. (1926) the Supreme Court said: "The doctrine 
of the separation of powers was adopted by the Convention of 1787, not to 
promote efficiency but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power. The purpose 
was, not to avoid friction, but, by means of the inevitable friction incident to the 
distribution of the governmental powers among three departments, to save the 
people from autocracy. ...Speed and efficiency, however, are not the proper ends of 
government. If they were, the framers would have created a dictatorship." Rule by 
executive edict means that a president can sign a piece of paper and pass unpopular 
laws that are totally against the will of Congress and the people, as we saw when 
Clinton used an EO to loan money to Mexico. 

Those promoting the new world order are deliberately changing our history 
and culture. A good book that describes how history books are confusing and 
distorting our history is Lies My Teacher Told Me, by James W. Loewen. Text 
book publishers avoid controversies, only present a positive tone, and ignore 
much American history. Schools socialize students to be good and obedient 
citizens. The racial prejudice of people like President Wilson, the contributions of 
women, and the role of militias in founding our Republic are removed from 
history. Issues such as General Butler and the planned military coup, the 
munitions hearings in the 1930s, and corporate treason during World War II are 
rarely discussed in history books. Loewen, to his credit, said there may be an 
upper-class conspiracy "manipulated by elite white male capitalists who 
orchestrate how history is written as part of their scheme to perpetuate their own 
power and privilege at the expense of the rest of us."" State-controlled curricula 
promote corporate-influenced distortions of our heritage. 

It will be much harder for the younger generation to stand up for constitu- 
tional government because of the distortions being taught in the schools. In 
November, 1995 the U.S. Department of Education released a report based on 
questioning 22,000 school children about our history. Fifty percent of the children 
weren't even aware that the cold war existed! A 1994 study by the National As- 
sessment of Educational Progress revealed that 57 percent of public high school 
seniors lack a basic understanding of U.S. history. With poor schooling and TV 
addiction, for many history started with the New Deal. People no longer remember 
the values of our Republic and the wisdom of the Founders. The shift to outcome 
based education, Goals 2000, and multiculturalism means that if the corporate 
controllers aren't stopped, one day few people will defend the Constitution because 
few will even remember that it once existed. Multiculturalism has played a key 
role in destroying Canada 1 ' as a nation state, and this is also why it is being push- 
ed in the U.S. It is one more strategy being used to weaken national sovereignty, 
to move towards a world government. 

Multiculturalism is also being used to separate us from our Christian heritage 
and Western culture. Other cultures are highlighted while ours is undermined. The 



50 Treason The New World Order 



California Teachers Association released a calendar that doesn't identify July 4th. It 
includes Buddhist Nirvana day and Ramadan but not Christmas or Thanksgiving. 
The National Educational Association passed out millions of calenders to teachers 
that listed UN day and various Buddhist and Moslem holidays but did not mention 
Christmas. Listing various religious holidays is fine, but to remove traditional 
American religious and patriotic holidays is outrageous. 

Increasingly, basic American constitutional and political history is not being 
taught. Under the new world order, within a few generations our history will be 
forgotten, because it will be banned. On May 16, 1993 Parade Magazine published 
an article about putting false words in the mouth of dead people. It cited as an 
example the supposedly false words of Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me 
death.'"" In fact, Henry said these noble words, March 23, 1775, at St. John's 
Church in Richmond Virginia in conjunction with the second Virginia 
convention." Karl Marx said: "If you can cut people off from their history they 
can be easily persuaded." 

An important book is The Rewriting of America's History by Catherine 
Millard. A librarian at the Library of Congress, she documents many instances 
where our Christian heritage and memorial to the Founding Fathers are being 
erased or distorted. Independence Square in Philadelphia, where the Constitution 
and Declaration of Independence were signed, had a National Museum which was 
taken over by the Independence National Historic Park in 1951. The museum was 
disbanded with its contents dispersed to different buildings and many of the 
exhibits are no longer available to the public. Important Christian markers and 
plaques around Philadelphia have been replaced with humanistic plaques. The 
Liberty Bell has been moved from its original site and it is now called a "symbol 
of world freedom." An important painting "The First Prayer in Congress" has been 
lost. In Christ Church in Philadelphia, often called the Nation's Church, famous 
stained glass such as "Patriots Window" and "Liberty Window" were moved, 
supposedly to be cleaned, but instead they have been replaced by plain glass." 

Sections of the Library of Congress have been closed for renovations, but the 
"improvements" made it much harder for librarians and researchers to use the facil- 
ities. The main card catalogue was almost deliberately destroyed except that the 
librarians and their union prevented this by threatening to sue. The computerized 
replacement has an error rate of 50 percent. The new head librarian in October 15, 
1987 fired many people with no replacements, leaving various departments dis- 
organized and understaffed. In an especially disgusting display of what is happen- 
ing, religious scenes in the Library of Congress were replaced during renovations 
by grotesque gargoyle paintings. This exemplifies how Christ will be replaced by 
atheism or worse in the new world order. 

In the Library of Congress rare books pertaining to our Christian heritage and 
the Founding Fathers are now listed as "missing in inventory" and "changed to the 
rare book collection," which means the public cannot see these books. In some 
instances, Millard found that books listed as missing were in their correct place. 
Millard listed groups of books that were all removed from circulation at the same 
time. There is an organized campaign to remove from public reach rare books on 
Christianity and the Founding Fathers. In some historical and religious exhibits, 
American history has been greatly altered and falsified. Millard was refused 
promotions and salary raises when she fought these changes. 



Fooling the People 51 



Deborah Maceda works for the Library of Congress as a police detective in its 
Protective Services Office. For several years she complained about many books 
being damaged and stolen. One would expect that she would have been thanked for 
doing her job. Instead her many memos, which also included ways to improve 
security, were ignored until she was transferred. There were proceedings to fire her 
until Congress intervened. Now several agencies, including the FBI are investig- 
ating the Library of Congress which a union called "out of control."" On July 6, 
1996 CBS Evening News said the Library of Congress was often using psychia- 
trist testing, which are generally illegal in the workplace, to harass and fire 
whistleblowers. 

"If people are stripped of the ability... to make their own things and their own 
history, they may continue to act properly, but they lose the capacity to learn for 
themselves about their own Tightness. They stagnate or surrender. ...Those who 
steal their right to make their own history. ..can be condemned, for they steal from 
people the right to know what they know, the right to become human. ...History 
is culture." 20 Our history is being cleansed to fit what our corporate controllers 
want. 

Since 1670 when a jury refused to convict William Penn, it has been part of 
our heritage that juries have a right to decide a case based on the law as well as the 
facts of the case. In 1794 Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Jay said in 
Georgia v. Brailsford: "The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the 
fact in controversy." Alexander Hamilton said: "Jurors should acquit, even against 
the judge's instruction. ..if exercising their judgement with discretion and honesty 
they have a clear conviction that the charge of the court is wrong." The 
Constitutions of four states — Maryland, Indiana, Oregon, and Georgia — 
specifically guarantee the right of jurors to "judge the law." Today 23 states declare 
the right of jury nullification (the right of a jury to judge a law) in freedom of 
speech regarding libel and sedition. Throughout the 1800s this principle was 
primarily challenged only once when Congress passed an anti-slave law which 
northern juries refused to support. Then the government was close to the people, 
so laws were rarely passed that were against the people's wishes. However, in 
1895 in Sparfand Hansen v. U.S., the Supreme Court ruled that while juries still 
had the right to judge the law a judge didn't have to inform a jury of this." 

In the 1900s we have been swamped with laws that many are against because 
government often no longer represents the people. The Fully Informed Jury 
Association (FIJA) informs citizens of the right to reject a law while on a jury 
despite what a judge states." People informing perspective jurors of this right 
have been harassed by the authorities, and some have been arrested and tried for 
jury tampering. In other words, people just quoting the words of the Founding 
Fathers like Thomas Jefferson are being arrested. The authorities are getting 
desperate, because increasingly juries in various cases are voting not guilty as 
word gets out. Perhaps next people telling perspective jurors about the right to 
free speech and freedom of worship will also be arrested. Where will it stop? On 
June 19, 1995 CBS Evening News completely distorted our history. A judge said 
letting a jury decide the law would create anarchy and this would be taking the law 
into their own hands. The head of the FIJA was interviewed and while he discussed 
the views of the Founders supporting the right of jury nullification, this was 
censored from what appeared on TV. 



52 Treason The New World Order 



After the Oklahoma bombing, the Wall Street Journal wrote a propaganda 
piece defining jury-power activism as a racist and anti-Semitic militia plot. That 
the Founders and many justices have long supported this right, which exists to 
this day, was ignored." The Village Voice quoted this article suggesting that jury 
rights people may well be extremists and racists." It was stated in the Wall Street 
Journal, so it must be true! Disinformation creates more lies and our heritage is 
gradually forgotten. A few public trials like the O.J. case are now being used as an 
excuse to attack and change the jury system to further weaken our civil rights. 

Another strategy is to create more crime and a false war on drugs by 
deliberately flooding the country with illegal drugs. "U.S. officials had undercut 
the war on drugs for so long, and exposes had dribbled out so sporadically, that 
public outrage never reached critical mass."" This is being done to scare people 
into giving up certain constitutionally protected rights such as the right to bear 
arms. Chaos and fear have historically been used to create a totalitarian state. 
Rather than trying to seize all guns, a far better solution to crime would be to 
resolve the issues that have turned people to criminal activity and to stop the 
government from flooding the country with illegal drugs. 

On one radio show, a student quoted his college professor as saying the main 
reason why the Founders wanted people to own a gun was to prevent government 
tyranny. The "expert" on the show, who had written a book on gun control, said 
this was a myth. Most historians and legal scholars understand that the student and 
his professor are correct, but many now say otherwise. One reason we no longer 
have constitutional government is because our constitutional heritage is being 
relegated to the level of a myth. On May 9, 1994 ABC ran Day One: America 
Under the Gun. A reporter said with so much crime the Constitution is becoming 
a luxury. 

The media constantly tells us that crime keeps getting worse when that is not 
true. The Washington Center for Media and Public Affairs found that between 
1992 and 1993 the number of crime stories reported on ABC, CBS, and NBC had 
doubled. The drug scare is being used as an excuse to tighten government control 
over the people and to strengthen the national security state. Crime is being used 
as an excuse to federalize and militarize state and local police into a unified 
national police force. 

An obvious example of how drugs have been used to control and demoralize 
the people is exemplified by the black ghettos being flooded with illegal drugs. 
Ample supply helped create demand. The radical black movement of the 1960s 
became submerged in a drug haze. Louis Farrakhan was quite right to state, when 
being interviewed by Barbara Walters on ABC in 1994, that in the mid-1960s the 
black community was suddenly flooded with illegal drugs and this was done by the 
government. Norval Morris, a law professor, interviewed almost 100 experts in 
law enforcement and they called the war on drugs a war against blacks. White 
people buy and sell most illegal drugs, but most people imprisoned are black." 

It is much easier to control and manipulate a society that loses its will to 
drugs. Drug use weakens will power and the ability for independent thinking. This 
can be illegal drugs like cocaine or legal drugs like Prozac or Valium. Many 
schools post "Drug Free Zone" signs and proceed to drug the children with Ritalin 
to control them. The end result is that people have difficulty thinking clearly and 
defending their rights, which are slowly being lost. When Japan ruled China 



Fooling the People 53 



during World War II, it flooded China with opium, as did England in the 1800s, to 
control the populace and raise money for government operations." 

Besides these key strategies, many other techniques are used to fool the 
people. Reasonable goals are proclaimed that most would support, while hidden 
objectives are promoted that support the one world government. Noble objectives 
are promoted that also provide more wealth and control for the corporate elite 
while weakening the rights of the people. False promises of greater material 
wealth, jobs, and environmental protection were used to promote NAFTA and 
GATT, while these treaties actually foster the destruction of the middle class and 
U.S. sovereignty. Under President Carter there was a call to help third world 
nations with their debt crisis. Many decent people wanted to raise the standard of 
living in these nations, so they supported a plan to provide assistance. Instead that 
money was used to pay interest on multinational bank loans. 

Asset forfeiture laws show that laws are passed, supposedly to protect the 
people against criminals, and then the laws are enforced well beyond their original 
intent or language to remove the people's rights. These laws were originally pass- 
ed to seize the property of drug dealers and mafia leaders, but today they are often 
applied to innocent citizens while the criminals hide their assets so they cannot be 
seized. These laws are being enacted supposedly to protect the people, when in fact 
constitutional rights are violated. 

Another strategy is to introduce an especially egregious law or program in a 
less-populated state where there is less media coverage. If the law passes, it is 
introduced in other states. If there is great resistance, the government backs down, 
always watching how the people react, perhaps presenting the same law in another 
state with certain changes. In 1989 Oklahoma passed a law requiring everyone to 
register their assets, with a heavy fine if you refused or hid any assets, so similar 
laws may be passed in other states. As discussed in Chapter XV, today the 
National Guard has basically established martial law in parts of Puerto Rico. This 
has been going on for several years with little press coverage. It is done in the 
name of protecting the people from crime, as the people lose their rights. How 
long will it be before this occurs in many states? 

Very long laws are passed that include obscure clauses that are difficult to find 
and that few would support. These clauses are rarely discussed by the press or in 
Congress. After Senator Brown read NAFTA, a 2,000 page document, he was 
shocked enough to reverse his vote and reject it. The GATT treaty establishing the 
World Trade Organization contains 22,000 pages. Provisions in GATT make it 
harder for Americans to save for retirement. The amount U.S. employees can 
contribute to 401(k) plans has been reduced to compensate for lost revenue due to 
tariffs being reduced. A UN food safety and trade commission will help set GATT 
standards, which may lower or remove many U.S. consumer safety laws such as 
pesticide use. We may soon be flooded with radiated products because other nations 
will insist on this under GATT. Under the Constitution, Article 1, Section 8 
Clause 3, Congress shall "regulate Commerce with foreign Nations...." This has 
been illegally surrendered by GATT — to a foreign entity. 

GATT created a new commission, CODEX, under the UN World Health 
Organization. It is now in the process of establishing strict international standards 
which will require a doctor's prescription to obtain supplements, because this is 
what the large drug companies want. This will cause many problems in the 
alternative health movement, and many health food stores will close. Politicians 



54 Treason The New World Order 



like Clinton and Dole will complain for five minutes, and then pass more laws 
destroying U.S. sovereignty. 

After the Oklahoma bombing, I constantly read and heard the right wing 
attacked in the national media as being conspiracy nuts, partly because it felt the 
UN was a serious threat to the U.S. Never once was mere a discussion of the huge 
body of evidence supporting such concerns. A classic example of this propaganda 
took place in late October, 1995 on Talk of the Nation, a PBS talk radio show. 
The topic was the UN and the three guests were all pro-UN. Sure enough, as the 
show began, the announcer asked about right-wing concerns over the UN 
controlling the U.S. The three guests immediately agreed this was foolish. This 
was like asking a Marxist to criticize communism. When you debate a topic and 
have three guests, at least one should take an opposing position. Otherwise, you 
just get propaganda. 

It is not that the UN alone is a threat, it is the large corporations that have 
always controlled the UN, and the concern is what they plan to do with it. Right 
from the start the UN has been a corporate front. The CFR, led by the Soviet 
agent Alger Hiss, played a key role in establishing the UN, and its headquarters are 
built on Rockefeller-donated land. The U.S. delegation to form the UN included 
many CFR members. The press declares that the UN is quite disorganized and 
incompetent, and an example of this is the failed UN peacekeeping operations. 
This is a convenient excuse to hide the future plans for the UN to be the center of 
a one world government. C.B. Dall, FDR, My Exploited Father-in-Law, said: 
"The UN is but a long-range, international-banking apparatus neatly set up for 
financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One-World 
Revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power. " 2 " 

Truman signed the UN Participation Act on December 20, 1945. Under this 
act "The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the 
Congress" to provide troops to the UN security council as the president desired. 
The constitutional requirement that only Congress can declare a war was illegally 
weakened by this treaty. Rep. Frederick Smith said: "This measure strikes at the 
very heart of the Constitution. It provides that the power to declare war shall be 
taken from Congress and given to the President. Here is the essence of dictator- 
ship, and dictatorial control over all else must inevitably tend to follow." Time is 
proving him correct. Congress has little influence over how the U.S. votes at the 
UN. The UN, not Congress, approved the Korean War. At the UN on October 24, 
1950 Truman said: "The men who laid down their lives for the UN in Korea. ..died 
in order that the UN might live." Are you prepared to die for the UN? Ask the 
relatives of the 54,000 soldiers killed in that "nonwar" if we should be concerned 
about the UN. To this day U.S. troops serving in Korea serve under the UN. 
When U.S. serviceman David Hilemon was killed over North Korea in 1994, his 
body was returned in a casket covered with a UN flag. On April 25, 1996, 
Anthony Lake, Clinton's national security adviser, said in a lecture we need to be a 
"global 911" to manage the world's crises. 

While many criticize the actions of UN peacekeepers, people don't understand 
that NATO is a military arm of the UN. NATO and SEATO were created as 
collective defense organizations under Article 51 of the UN charter. Articles 1, 5, 
7, and 12 in the NATO treaty show the reliance of NATO on the UN for its 
legitimacy. On December 15, 1995, the UN Security Council approved the NATO 
mission to Bosnia. This approval was necessary for NATO to act. Supporting the 



Fooling the People 55 



policy of the UN being used to create a one world government, the new head of 
NATO is a Spanish Marxist. Rep. Funderburk and 35 others in Congress attacked 
this appointment. 

Led by members of the CFR in 1961, the U.S. State Department issued a 
publication, Freedom From War, outlining in detail plans to disarm the U.S. 
military and establish a UN army. The U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament 
Agency, also established in 1961, is working towards this goal. Books like A 
World Effectively Controlled By the UN, Introduction to World Peace Through 
World Law, and World Peace Through World Law describe these plans in great 
detail. Aside from local police who will carry small arms, the entire world is to be 
disarmed except for a powerful UN army and police force. In 1992, UN Secretary 
General Boutros Ghali presented An Agendafor Peace calling for a permanent UN 
army. The report said: "The time of absolute and exclusive sovereignty has 
passed," and it listed reasons that would justify the UN using its army to intervene 
in a nation. Senator Boren, in the New York Times August 26, 1992, said the 
world needs a UN army to create the new world order. On June 27, 1995 the New 
York Times called for a UN world army that could be paid for by people paying 
dues as UN citizens. Articles 42 and 43 of the UN charter provide the basis for 
creating a UN army under the UN Security Council." In the April 11, 1993 
Washington Post, the prominent journalist George Will said "Article 43 is the law 
of the land — our land." Why weren't the American people asked to approve this 
change? 

For years there have been calls for ensuring UN domination by transferring all 
nuclear weapons to a UN army. No nation will be allowed to have nuclear 
weapons. On December 17, 1995 the Rocky Mountain News said Clinton trans- 
ferred a ton ofplutonium at Rocky Flats and 199 tons of nuclear material in Oak 
Ridge, Tennessee to the UN. Done without congressional approval, this represents 
20 percent of U.S. strategic nuclear reserves. 

Foreign Policy, a corporate mouthpiece, presented an article that actually 
listed nations to be taken over by the UN. " The use of UN troops in Somalia and 
Haiti exemplifies the coming trend. Clinton used U.S. troops to enter Haiti after 
receiving UN permission; he refused to seek the approval of Congress as required 
by the Constitution. Strobe Talbott, a CFR member and Deputy Secretary of 
State, said "once a country utterly loses its ability to govern itself, it also loses its 
claim to sovereignty and should become a ward of the UN.'" 1 Under the Dayton 
Accord, Bosnia got a new Constitution which surrendered sovereignty and required 
that it become a UN protectorate. Foreign judges will be appointed and a UN 
representative will be "the final authority in theatre."" Rep. Duncan Hunter, in the 
January 26, 1996 Human Events, said Bosnia will be controlled for five years and 
that our commitment to reshape this society is much deeper and longer than the 
American people understand. Already the New York Times reported on June 13, 
1996 that U.S. troops may have to remain in Bosnia beyond 1996. The Bosnia 
horror may have been deliberately created so the UN solution could be provided as 
a test case to end a nation's sovereignty. William Pfaff in the International Herald 
Tribune, which is owned by the Washington Post and New York Times, said: 
"The principle of absolute national sovereignty is being overturned. ...The civil 
war in Yugoslavia has rendered this service to us." 

Another example of this pattern occurred in late July, 1991 on CNN. 
Stansfield Turner, ex-head of the CIA, said about Iraq: "We have a much bigger 



56 Treason The New World Order 



objective. We've got to look at the long run here. This is an example — the 
situation between the UN and Iraq — where the UN is deliberately intruding into the 
sovereignty of a sovereign nation. ...Now this is a marvelous precedent (for) all 
countries of the world...." In 1933 H.G. Wells, in The Shape of Things to Come, 
said the new world order would develop in around 50 years out of a conflict near 
Basra, Iraq when "Russia is ready to assimilate." With the Gulf War, he was 
almost correct. 

Already an international police force has formed and is serving in Bosnia. The 
Daily Universe quoted Kissinger associate Lawrence Eagleburger's speech at 
Brigham Young University on November 8, 1994. He said: The U.S. "can either 
become the world policeman, or an international policing force must be 
established with adequate authority and force to maintain world peace.... We have to 
be the world's thought policemen to create a world police force." In 1995 the U.S. 
contributed millions of dollars to establish an international police training center 
in Hungary. 

The Chicago Tribune, on September 29, 1993 presented an editorial by Bob 
Greene describing the many problems in the U.S. He said a UN multinational 
force is desperately needed in the U.S. On April 16, 1996 NBC Evening News said 
"5,000 police officers from around the world" will protect the Olympics in 
Atlanta. Newsweek on June 24 said "foreign law enforcenment agencies" would 
protect the Olympics. The Economist said on June 22 that over 2,000 interna- 
tional police would be on hand. Obviously, the U.S. has enough trained people to 
provide proper security, but this exercise will help get Americans used to foreign 
troops patrolling our streets. 

The unofficial word in the U.S. military is that, to get ahead in their careers 
officers must promote working under the UN in various peacekeeping missions. 
Traditional patriotism is no longer sufficient. This new role was described by 
James J. Schneider in the April, 1995 military journal Special Warfare. Schneider 
teaches at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. He said: "The 
U.S. Army of the future will face its greatest challenge since the end of the Civil 
War. ...The future will be dominated by a single overwhelming presence — the 
United Nations. The resurgence and growing influence of the UN will not only 
affect our soldiers but may change the very structure of the nation-state...." There 
is growing pressure on military officers to adjust to the new world order or to 
resign. 

On May 24, 1994 the UN Disarmament Commission adopted a working 
paper proposing the control of guns in the U.S. and other nations to limit 
international arms trafficking. Clinton supports this objective. Foreign Affairs 
called for the prompt global control of small arms and weapons, because such 
weapons allow militias to challenge UN and U.S. troops. There may one day be a 
treaty requiring strict gun control in the U.S." 

There are growing calls for a world UN tax. In 1993 the Ford Foundation 
financed a study, Financing an Effective United Nations, by TC and CFR 
members. This report called for a UN tax. The UN's Human Development Report, 
in 1994 called for a UN tax. A global UN tax was discussed at the UN conference 
in Copenhagen in 1995. Sweden's Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson, Australia's 
Foreign Minister Gareth Evansand, and Pakistan's Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto 
have called for a UN tax. Jon Stewart wrote a column that appeared in many 
newspapers calling for a UN tax. Reportedly the International Court of Justice 



Fooling the People 57 



may force Congress to pay this future tax." On January 15, 1996 and in the 
March/April 1996 issue of Foreign Affairs, Boutros Ghali called for a UN tax and 
said ultimately such a tax would be applied. On May 13, 1996 The Nation called 
for a world flat tax to support the UN and other global institutions. According to 
this article "A global flat tax. ..would be in the interest of working and middle- 
class Americans." If you prefer to think that concern about a new world order is 
foolish fantasy, you will one day look back and think how low your taxes once 
were. In the new world order, there will be a new direct tax to support the world 
government. The U.S., which strongly supports the UN, could easily pay the 
money it owes the UN. However, using congressional resistance, the government 
may be deliberately creating a crisis, so that the UN will be given the authority to 
tax people directly. 

In 1994 the Congressional Research Service published a revised version of a 
1990 report "An International Criminal Court" stating that the UN is gradually 
trying to establish a permanent criminal court. In the future U.S. citizens may be 
tried before such a court for many different crimes. Foreign Affairs called for the 
examination of bank deposits in all nations and to establish a Global Bank Police 
to enhance banking security and limit money laundering." Certain sites, like 
Yellowstone, have been declared World Heritage Sites by the UN. Park rangers in 
certain Colorado parks admit off the record that some land is now controlled by the 
UN. In other countries the UN has intervened in how land is used. The recent book 
Our Global Neighborhood in 410 pages outlined in great detail the coming world 
government. The plan, in the next few years, is to quietly sign treaties that will 
force all nations to join a world government. There are many books that explain 
how dangerous the UN is. As with many of the issues discussed in this chapter, 
this is a complex topic I will discuss in more detail in a future book. 

Manipulating statistics is another widely used gimmick to fool the people. 
Clinton said domestic violence is the number one "health risk for women between 
the ages of 15 and 44 in our country" as he announced federal grants of $26 
million to prevent this violence. According to the AP on March 22, 1995, the 
government released shocking statistics such as a claim that three to four million 
women a year are victims of domestic violence, to support Clinton's claim. 
Various authorities challenged this claim with some questioning what the 
government defines as violence. Detroit News columnist Tony Snow said 
typically in Washington "When you want to persuade people to do something that 
they see no need to do, don't reason with them. Make up a statistic so stunning 
that they will feel obligated to go along." Naturally, one result is more govern- 
ment control over our lives. 

Other statistics are hidden from the people. We are constantly told that gun 
control is essential to ease the crime problem, yet when statistics suggest 
otherwise they are hidden or denied. Since Florida passed a law in 1987, 100,000 
people have obtained a license to carry concealed handguns. There have been few 
abuses with only 17 licenses revoked because of a crime committed with a licensed 
gun. The national murder rale increased 12 percent between 1987 and 1992 but it 
dropped 21 percent in Florida. In this same period, Florida crime rose 17.8 percent 
but nationally it rose 24 percent. 

Typically when a scandal surfaces and the public is aroused, an investigation 
is held but the people doing the investigating are carefully chosen, so that some 
information is released to satisfy the public but the full story is suppressed. This 



58 Treason The New World Order 



is done to convince people that the system still works. And officials may lie or 
not call certain witnesses during an investigation to cover-up unpleasant facts. 
After the Ames case broke, the CIA director said he would propose that Brent 
Scowcroft and Harold Brown should head a committee to review U.S. intelligence 
operations. It is business as usual with these CFR members. In the recent 
Whitewater hearings, Congress refused to question key people like Larry Nichols. 
Bo Gritz was only called at the last minute at the end of the Randy Weaver 
hearings with little press coverage. 

The Task Force on Radiation and Human Rights tried to get people who were 
more sympathetic to the victims added to the government's recent investigation of 
secret government radiation experiments on people, but the White House was not 
responsive. Key people on the government's committee have links to the radiation 
experiments they are now investigating. Some panel members were from the same 
institutions being investigated.'" One member of the government's investigation, 
Jay Katz, a medical ethics specialist said: "We don't want to pass severe moral 
judgments, because it's really more important to look at the present."" The 
standards have changed little from the 1940s, when the 1946 Nuremberg Code was 
established which required the agreement of people in experiments." Already the 
Clinton regime is showing signs of wanting to get done with this story without 
revealing too much. The investigating committee released an Interim Report in 
October, 1994, and reported that various government agencies including the CIA 
are not providing the required information. 

The three events that provided a convenient rationale for big government, and 
thus greater corporate power in the 20th century, were the two world wars and the 
great depression, with the resulting New Deal. In each instance the large 
corporations manipulated the people by using the Hegelian principle of creating a 
problem, then creating opposing views, and finally providing solutions that the 
people would otherwise never have accepted. Often one position has definite 
weaknesses, so the people will unknowingly accept the choice of the corporate 
elite. 

During these emergencies, the government needed to borrow money which 
allowed the bankers to gain influence and profit. In such emergencies, the 
government surrendered more of its sovereignty to the large banks as collateral. 
This strategy has been used many times to create wasteful bureaucracies further 
enhancing federal corporate power. During a national crisis, normal constitutional 
restraints are forgotten, and once the federal government gets new powers it rarely 
gives them up. The constitutional scholar, Edward S. Corwin, said the New Deal 
and World War II greatly increased presidential powers and was leading to the 
dissolution of constitutional government and law. Our constitutional system of 
dual federalism and the doctrine of separation of powers has been radically altered 
as tremendous power shifted to the central government." 

During the great depression many like, Charles A. Beard in The Open Door 
At Home, felt the U.S. would best develop though regional trade, high tariffs, and 
self-sufficiency. The CFR used the depression to claim that it was partly caused by 
limiting trade and that global free trade would help solve the depression." It is a 
deliberately created myth that the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act of 1930 and "laissez- 
faire capitalism" of the 1920s caused the 1929 crash and great depression, so that 
big government was needed to control the excesses of capitalism. In previous 
depressions, the government didn't intervene, and the depression was settled much 



Fooling the People 59 



sooner and with far lower unemployment than in the 1930s. Extensive 
government intervention in the New Deal guaranteed a long and deep depression. 4 ' 

Business cycles, especially depressions, are very influenced by government 
monetary intervention. Murray N. Rothbard and the Ludwig von Mises Institute 
have provided ample evidence that government intervention with loose bank credit 
during the 1920s played a key role in creating the great depression. There was a 
major increase in money supply from 1921 until July, 1929 primarily from an 
increase in bank deposits and bank credits. A House hearing on stabilizing the 
dollar disclosed, in 1928, that the Federal Reserve was working closely with 
European central banks and a major crash was planned." The Federal Reserve 
followed a policy of continuous credit and a low discount during the 1920s causing 
inflation and foreign lending. By manipulating interest rates they inflated stock 
prices and then a tightened money supply caused a collapse in stock prices. Even 
Alan Greenspan, current head of the Federal Reserve admitted in The Objectivist 
July, 1966, that Fed excess credit policies in the 1920s "nearly destroyed the 
economies of the world." 

Various bankers, such as J. P. Morgan, deliberately created several artificial 
panics to pressure the formation of a central bank. In the panic of 1893, Senator 
Robert Owen testified before a congressional committee about the Panic Circular 
of 1893 that his bank received. It said: "You will at once retire one-third of your 
circulation and call in one-half of your loans...." Life magazine on April 25, 1949, 
discussed the role of the Morgan bank in creating the panic of 1907." William 
Bryan in The United States Unresolved Monetary and Political Problems described 
how the New York banks methodically called in broker call loans which meant 
stocks had to be sold which helped start the market collapse. After the Federal 
Reserve was created Rep. Charles Lindberg said: "From now on depressions will 
be scientifically created." 

Rep. Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking Committee, said: "It 
(the depression) was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence. ...The 
international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they 
might emerge as the rulers of us all." On November 21, 1971 the New York 
Times Magazine quoted Rep. McFadden as stating the Federal Reserve Act 
established "a world banking system. ..a super-state controlled by international 
bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for 
their own pleasure." Every American should read McFadden's nine page statement 
about the Fed in the Congressional Record on June 10, 1932. 

People were fooled into buying more stocks so they desperately needed 
government help after the market crashed. The Fed encouraged short-term 
borrowing then, at the appointed time, it called in the loans. Wealthy individuals 
aware of this manipulation sold slocks short or stayed out of the market and men 
made a fortune during the depression by buying stocks at sharply discounted 
prices. In FDR, My Exploited Father-In-Law, C.B. Dall said: the depression "was 
the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World-Money powers, triggered by 
the planned sudden shortage of the supply of call money in the New York money 
market. Dall worked on the New York stock exchange floor during the depression. 
He said each day Ben Smith, supported by Tom Bragg and Joe Kennedy and their 
brokers, sold stocks short to undercut the entire market. 44 

In 1913 just before Christmas with only a few members present, Congress 
passed the Federal Reserve Act. No one challenged the false claim that the states 



60 Treason The New World Order 



had ratified this act. The Ninth Circuit court held in Lewis v. U.S. (1982) the 
"Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned, locally controlled corporations." Title 
12 U.S. C. 283 and Title 12 U.S. C. 287 even list stock valuation information 
for this private corporation. The Fed is owned by various U.S. and European 
banks, yet under the Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, only Congress has the 
power "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof...." If the U.S. Treasury prints 
money, there is no interest. Instead the government borrows billions of dollars a 
year paying about $250 billion a year just in interest for Federal Reserve notes 
that have no real value, while the media perpetuates the myth that the Federal 
Reserve is part of the U.S. government. The federal debt developed after the 
Federal Reserve was established, while gold and silver certificates were replaced by 
Federal Reserve notes. Congress cannot even investigate the daily activities of the 
Fed. This fraud worked because the politicians committed treason, and the people 
were asleep. In FDR, My Exploited Father -in-Low, C.B. Dall said: "The One- 
World Government leaders and their ever-close bankers. ..have now acquired full 
control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S...., via the creation. ..of the 
privately owned Federal Reserve Bank." 4 ' 

Like any private corporation, the Fed takes actions to protect its stockholders; 
it does not represent the American people or even the federal government. This is 
why so many criticize Fed policies over interest rates. Your IRS checks are 
deposited into this private bank not in the U.S. Treasury, with no real 
accountability as to where the funds actually go. President Kennedy was 
assassinated partly because he printed U.S. Treasury notes along with the usual 
Federal Reserve notes. The Fed is the only profit-making corporation in the U.S. 
that isn't taxed. The talk about balancing the budget is an attempt to deflect the 
people's attention about the illegal activities of the Federal Reserve and the fact 
that the U.S. is bankrupt. Someday people will look back and wonder in 
amazement that so many people could have been so fooled for so many years by 
this scam. 

The New Deal reforms were originally presented to extend and share governing 
power to assist the weak and unrepresented. The proclaimed goal was to create new 
forums and agencies for decision making, to provide a vehicle for citizens to be 
more involved in a representative government. Instead the New Deal enhanced 
government power over the people, created a national emergency that continues 
today, and allowed the power of the moneyed interests to spread. The federal 
government that has existed since the New Deal is an aberration that is anathema 
to our political heritage. Constitutional restraints were removed in the name of 
more democracy and greater equality. In 1936 former Senator James A. Reed, 
previously a supporter of the New Deal, attacked it as a "tyrannical" measure 
"leading to despotism, sought by its sponsors under the communistic cry of 
'social justice.'" On the Senate floor he said Roosevelt's family "is one of the 
largest stockholders in" GE, and FDR was a "hired man for the economic 
royalists" on Wall Street. 

The New Deal welfare state was set up with the intention of having a free 
people become addicted to big government. The welfare state represents 
government addiction. The process was like drug dealers who go to schools and 
give away free drugs, so people will become addicted and buy more and more. 
Then it is that much easier to manipulate and control the people. The myth was 
created that big government is good and that it should take care of everyone. The 



Fooling the People 61 



foremost principle of the Founding Fathers was that people should be allowed to 
lead their lives without government interference. With the New Deal we achieved 
the exact opposite. Our tradition of limited constitutional government with a 
system of checks and balances was forgotten. The mythology that Roosevelt saved 
America from the great depression and helped lead us through the second world war 
covers up the fact that we were once a free and independent people with little 
government interference except in clearly delineated areas. In the New Deal people 
sacrificed freedom and a belief that our rights come from God for a false sense of 
economic security. The paternalistic welfare system perpetuates dependency and 
weakness while robbing us of self-reliance and citizenship. A primary goal today 
should be not just to reinvent government but to restore responsible citizenship. 

Numerous historians have pondered why there weren't more radical changes 
during the New Deal. William E. Leuchtenburg, author of Franklin D. Roosevelt 
and the New Deal 1932-1940 and a widely respected scholar of the New Deal, 
called it a "halfway revolution." He concluded that Roosevelt carefully prevented 
challenges to vested interests, while the unorganized people rarely benefited. The 
National Recovery Administration did little to speed recovery and probably 
hindered it, the Agricultural Adjustment Agency curbed farm production when 
people were hungry which also hurt tenant farmers, and the Home Owners Loan 
Corporation helped refinance homes but also foreclosed on 100,000 mortgages. 

Walter Karp in Indispensable Enemies has perhaps presented the best 
summary and analysis of Roosevelt's phony policies. "Roosevelt almost never 
fought for reform until it was forced upon him by overwhelming popular pressure, 
whereupon he saw to it that the reform enacted was as minimal as he could make 
it. ...Roosevelt's duplicity was a heinous act of bad faith and betrayal."" For 
instance, the Emergency Banking Relief Act was a very conservative document 
that restored the bankers' power at public expense, despite what reformers wanted. 

Richard Hofstadter in The Age of Reform criticized the New Deal for 
opportunism and stressed the discontinuity of the New Deal with the populist 
reform tradition. Howard Zinn said Roosevelt was cautious about supporting 
candidates who wanted bold economic and social change, and he never created new 
political forces among the poor and disadvantaged who would have helped bring 
about a more complete economic transformation and redistribution of wealth. 4 ' 

Barton J. Bernstein said most New Deal reforms accomplished far less than 
many claimed. "Though vigorous in rhetoric and experimental in tone, the New 
Deal was narrow in its goals and wary of bold economic reform." The "maneuvers 
in social reform were limited to cautious excursions." The New Deal reforms did 
not transform the American system; there was no real redistribution of income. 
Corporations did not become more responsible, and the political power of 
businesses was never weakened. Instead it grew stronger. Many Americans received 
no assistance in the 1930s, and while most ultimately didn't starve, there was little 
improvement in the economic lives of people aside from the rhetoric. 4 * 

I have discussed the New Deal partly because of another gigantic hoax called 
the Contract With America. This is another sophisticated plan to give the large 
corporations more money and power," and it is another diversion to distract the 
people and Congress while more of our rights are removed. Amazingly many 
consider this contract revolutionary. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr feels the Republican 
attempts to dismantle the federal government is bringing the country back to the 
Articles of Confederation.'" 



62 Treason The New World Order 



Money magazine explained how, under the guise of attacking greedy lawyers, 
both houses with the aid of powerful financial lobbyists approved a law that 
seriously cripples the rights of investors to be protected against fraudulent 
financial advisors. The Republicans also strengthened federal controls and 
eliminated state laws that protected individual investors, supposedly to help the 
people. The representatives pushing this received large sums of money from 
groups like J. P. Morgan, Citicorp, and Merrill Lynch. The people want less 
federal control, but Congress won't really listen because the bankers and corporate 
elite control the Democratic/Republican party." Tort reform includes corporate 
friendly clauses that limit punitive damages and the amount that can be collected 
in personal injury cases. In addition, tax money still goes to Washington, and the 
push for more federal control over crime continues. 

The National Security Restoration Act was supposed to prevent U.S. troops 
from serving under UN command. On January 26, 1995, Secretary of State Warren 
Christopher lied before the House International Relations Committee declaring 
this provision unconstitutional. The resulting bill was so watered down that it is 
worthless. If the president certifies that service under the UN is in the vital 
national interest of the U.S., it is allowed, despite the Constitution. Article 1, 
Section 8 grants Congress the exclusive authority to declare war and raise and 
support the military. 

The Brookings Institution released a report, Fine Print, saying the Contract 
With America is not a radical break with big government. Instead it "represents the 
final consolidation" of federal power; it will not significantly lessen federal 
government control over our lives. "The Contract preserves the national 
government's role in making, administering, and funding the vast and varied array 
of post-New Deal and post-Great Society domestic policies and programs."" 

The contract and other Republican policies have been handled so poorly 
perhaps because there is a deliberate plan to defeat the freshmen members of the 
House. The corporate controllers don't really care who is in power in the Demo- 
cratic/Republican party, unless there are individuals who threaten their influence as 
is the case with many of the new Republicans. An obvious move for Wall Street 
is to bring back the big government Democrats. Unfortunately, these new Repub- 
licans are too naive to understand who is really in control. In 1936 Roosevelt had 
a serious problem when so many liberal democrats were elected. Not wanting real 
reforms that would help the people and injure corporate power, Roosevelt took 
steps that rolled back the liberal tide in 1938. We may be seeing the same 
maneuver today. 

The principle of providing government benefits to make the people more 
dependent on the government has been applied in hundreds of programs. Rep. 
Lamar Smith and Senator Simpson introduced bills to control immigration by 
creating a new federal computer system to identify every American hired. This 
would create a vast new federal bureaucracy and tighten federal control over the 
people despite GOP rhetoric. A national identification system is part of the plan. 

The Clinton health plan was supposed to benefit the people's health but it 
would have increased federal control with a smart card introduced for better 
surveillance over our lives. A universal Health Security Card would have become a 
national ID card, and it would have been harder to use alternative healing methods 
under Clinton's plan. Presently smart cards can store 1,600 pages of information. 



Fooling the People 63 



In 1992 candidate Clinton said: "Everyone will carry a smart card, encoded with his 
or her personal medical information."" 

There is a serious risk that our Constitution will be replaced with a corporate 
approved version. Several new Constitutions have already been prepared. For in- 
stance, in 1964, the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations spent millions of dollars 
preparing the Proposed Constitution for the New States of America. In it the Bill 
of Rights was replaced by the grant of certain privileges. Our God given rights 
would be assigned and granted by the state when it deemed appropriate. The World 
Constitution and Parliament Association in Lakewood, Colorado has already pre- 
pared a world Constitution for the planned world government. Steven Boyd in 
Alternative Constitutions for the U.S. presents 10 proposed new Constitutions. If 
the one world government takes over, the present Constitution will be banned as a 
subversive document. Phil Marsh a tax protester was brought to trial. One count 
involved him sending the Constitution through the mail. When McVeigh's sister 
was initially questioned about the Oklahoma bombing, the press said she was 
found with extremist literature like the Constitution. 

For years there have been attempts to hold a constitutional convention under 
the guise of weakening federal power and restoring state rights. In May, 1994 Utah 
Governor Mike Leavitt, a leader of the National Conference of State Legislatures 
which is supported by the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations, called for a 
Conference of States (COS). Leavitt said: "Our national government. ..is outdated 
and old-fashioned. ...There is a much better way." According to the May 25, 1994 
Salt Lake Tribune, Governor Leavitt called for a constitutional convention but 
people were so angry at this that he soon denied making such a statement. In 1995 
the National Governor's Association joined in the call to hold this meeting in 
Philadelphia October 22-25, the 50th anniversary of the UNs founding. With little 
public awareness, attending this convention was approved in various states, often 
with no debate, because of pressure by local political leaders. 

In each state people quietly promoted this convention, denying it would be a 
constitutional convention despite the gathering evidence. It was claimed that the 
meeting would not have the force of law, so why was each state legislator required 
to pass a Resolution of Participation? They required that two-thirds of the states 
pass the resolution which is what is required to hold a constitutional convention. 
The conference would make its own rules and, per the Constitution, could petition 
Congress to hold a Constitutional convention and do whatever they wanted, even 
though the American people would have no idea the meeting was even taking 
place. This would have been the first meeting of all the states since the original 
Constitutional convention, but the national media rarely discussed this plan. 

Senators Helms and Brown introduced Resolution 82 asking the states to 
convene a COS to add amendments to the Constitution "and that such states then 
consider whether it is necessary for the states to convene a constitutional 
convention pursuant to Article V of the Constitution of the U.S., in order to adopt 
such Amendment." Some people promoting COS, like Charles Cooper, openly 
call for changing our constitutional form of government. Paul Weyrich founder of 
the American Legislative Exchange Council which is also pushing COS said in a 
March 8, 1987 editorial in the Washington Post "Our national strategy is outdated, 
dysfunctional and insupportable. ...If we are going to be a serious nation, we need a 
serious system. ..we need some type of shadow government...." The clearest 
expression of subversion came in the book Reforming American Government 



64 Treason The New World Order 



released by the Committee on the Constitutional System, another CFR controlled 
group pushing for parliamentary government in America. One of it directors James 
M. Burn's, using text from The Power to Lead, said: "Let us face reality. The 
framers have simply been too shrewd for us. They have outwitted us. They 
designed separated institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail 
bridges, tinkering. If we are to 'turn the founders upside down'. ..we must directly 
confront the constitutional structure they erected."" 

The Patriot movement got numerous state legislators to reject attending this 
convention, so the necessary number of states required for it to convene was not 
attained and it was cancelled. There was an intense debate in about 25 states. The 
Philadelphia city council voted unanimously March 16, 1995 not to support 
holding the meeting. The Wall Street Journal pushed for a constitutional 
convention," while the New York Times in frustration announced that extreme 
right wing conspiracy theorists had blocked the meeting." 

This is a classic example of how the corporate view decides what is politically 
correct in America. The states rejected this phony conference because so many 
Americans complained to their state legislators. When America speaks and it 
doesn't reflect the corporate view the left or right is slandered. The canceling of 
this phony convention demonstrated the patriotism and influence of the Patriot 
movement. It also angered and scared the corporate elite. The call for this 
conference is coming from the large corporations, not from the people. 

Before, the plan was to quietly get the states to agree to hold this meeting 
without anyone noticing. Now the plan is to use money. The corporate elite, 
including Mobile, Chevron, and Philip Morris, have already announced plans to 
redouble their efforts and to donate millions of dollars to various legislators to 
hold this convention, which is now called a Federalism Summit, in 1996. A 
meeting was held in Cincinnati October 22, 1995 to plan the strategy. Contact 
your local representatives and tell them not to allow this convention, which would 
change the Constitution and remove many of our rights. 

James Weinstein, in The Corporate Idea in the Liberal State, 1900-1918, 
described how the liberal social reforms of the 20th century, from the New Deal to 
the New Frontier and the Great Society, ultimately were developed and managed by 
the corporations, not by progressive elements. The purpose always was to prevent 
anti-corporate sentiment and to control the marketplace. Weinstein describes "a 
conscious and successful effort to guide the economic and social policies of federal, 
state, and municipal governments by various business groupings in their own 
long-range interest as they perceived it." 

The special interest groups, especially the large corporations, remain in 
control of the federal government and various schemes are used to fool the people 
about this. As shown in the 1994 election many people are fed up with the 
overwhelming power of the federal government; yet there are few attempts by 
Congress to return power to the states and the people. Programs by the states to 
make changes in welfare still require money to come from the federal government. 
The Contract With America didn't even include lobbying and campaign-finance 
reforms. Most people remain convinced that the source of many problems is the 
government, when in fact it is that the large corporations control the government. 
This reality has been deflected by careful propaganda. We have all been lied to for 
so long that that we are losing sight of our heritage and the truth can be quite 
shocking. 



65 



Chapter VI 



State Rights and the Federal Government 



"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by 
gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden 
usurpations." 

James Madison 

"When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things shall be 
drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will. ..become as venal and 
oppressive as the government from which we are separated.... I believe the states 
can best govern our home concerns and the general government our foreign ones." 

Thomas Jefferson 



The first attempt at federation occurred in 1643. For defense purposes four 
New England colonies formed the United Colonics of New England which was 
called a firm and perpetual union. In 1686 the union was disbanded. The original 
Articles of Confederation were abandoned because the central government was too 
weak. Now we have gone to the other extreme. As stated in the Declaration of 
Independence July 4, 1776, "That whenever any Form of Government becomes 
destructive of these ends, (described freedoms) it is the Right of the People to alter 
or abolish it, and to institute new Government...." Our Constitution does not state 
that the federal government shall exist in perpetuity, partly because the Articles of 
Confederation were four times declared to exist in perpetuity yet that agreement 
soon failed. 

The federal government was created by 13 sovereign and free nations. Great 
Britain recognized the sovereign independence of each state at the 1783 Paris peace 
treaty. In Sturges vs. Crowninshield (1819), Chief Justice of the Supreme Court 
Marshall said at the beginning "we were divided into independent states, united for 
some purposes, but in most respects sovereign." These independent states decided 
on their own to accept the new Constitution. Before the Civil War the words used 
in various federal documents were "the U.S. are" but than that was changed to "the 
U.S. is." In older versions of the Bill of Rights the word "State" was always in 
capital letter but that is no longer true. Each of the 13 colonies performed the 
duties of sovereign states such as having a legislature to raise taxes and conduct 
war, raise a militia, and have relations with other states. To this day many states 
have economic relations with foreign nations to increase commerce. 

Before accepting the new Constitution, Massachusetts demanded "that it be 
explicitly declared that all powers not delegated by the aforesaid Constitution are 
reserved to the several States, to be by them exercised." According to the New 
Hampshire Constitution, "The people of this Commonwealth have the sole and 
exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent 



66 Treason The New World Order 



State; and do and forever hereafter shall exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdic- 
tion, and right which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them, expressly delegated 
to the U.S." 

When Virginia joined the new Union on June 25, 1788, it declared "the 
powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the U.S., 
may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or 
oppression...." When New Yorkjoined the Union on July 25, 1788, it said: "That 
the powers of Government may be re-assumed by the people, whensoever it shall 
become necessary to their happiness...." Rhode Island and North Carolina did not 
join the Union for over a year after the Union had been approved. They were con- 
sidered independent sovereign nations by the other states. Upon joining the Union, 
Rhode Island declared: "That the powers of Government may be resumed by the 
people, whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness...." Other state 
constitutions, like Texas, have similar protections. 

William Rawle wrote Views of the Constitution in 1825, suiting: "It depends 
on the State itself to retain or abolish the principle of representation, because it 
depends on itself whether or not it will continue a member of the Union. To deny 
this right would be inconsistent with the principle on which all our political 
systems are founded, which is, that the people have in all cases, a right to deter- 
mine how they will be governed. ...The secession of a State from the Union 
depends on the will of the people of such a State." Rawles, born in Philadelphia, 
was a friend of Benjamin Franklin and George Washington. His book was widely 
used in constitutional law courses at various colleges throughout the country, 
including at West Point. 

Before the Civil War, the states sometimes challenged federal authority. Many 
patriots today would draw inspiration from the debates in the late 1700s. The 
Alien and Sedition Acts angered many, and if Jefferson hadn't become president in 
1800 and rejected these laws, the country might have split apart. Many considered 
the federal government the enemy of the people, and newspaper criticism was 
widespread. In 1797 Jefferson said the federal government represented "foreign 
jurisdiction." 

The right of nullification was initially proclaimed in 1798, with the Virginia 
and Kentucky Resolutions, which were written by Madison and Jefferson. The 
doctrine of nullification is based on the understanding that the Union is an agree- 
ment among sovereign states, that the states have the right to judge violations of 
the Constitution, and the states don't have to follow the laws set forth by their 
agent, the federal government. Kentucky said nullification was the "rightful 
remedy" for violating the Constitution. Madison said federal inherent or implied 
powers were "creatures of ambition" which would ultimately "swallow up the 
State sovereignties." Since the states and the people created the Constitution, a 
state had a right to nullify or reject an unconstitutional federal law. 1 The federal 
government is an agent for the states that created it and who are its principals. 
Congress does not have the right to pass laws that violate the Constitution. Any 
such laws are invalid, because the federal government is not above the Constitu- 
tion. 

The U.S. did poorly in the War of 1812 partly because some states refused to 
provide a militia. They felt this was strictly a war between England and the federal 
government. In 1814 the New England states met in Hartford to consider seceding 



State Rights and the Federal Government 67 



from the Union because the war had cost them considerable trade losses. They 
proclaimed the right of nullification. 

In 1831 John Calhoun said: "The great and leading principle is that the 
general government emanated from the people of the several states, forming 
distinct political communities, and acting in their separate and sovereign capacity, 
and not from all the people forming one aggregate political community." Calhoun 
also said: "The object of a Constitution is to restrain the government, as that of 
laws is to restrain individuals." In the 1830s Georgia refused to follow several 
Supreme Court decisions regarding the Cherokee Indians. In 1832 South Carolina 
declared certain federal tariffs null and void. President Andrew Jackson, on Decem- 
ber 10, 1832, called nullification rebellion and treason, but both sides backed 
down. In the 1850s various northern States nullified the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law 
by passing personal liberty laws. Slavery was a constant source of tension before 
the Civil War. 

In 1848 Abraham Lincoln said: "Any people anywhere being inclined and hav- 
ing the power have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and 
form a new one that suits them better." In 1860, when confronted with these 
words, Lincoln defended his view of maintaining the Union by turning to God and 
the mystical belief that the Union must be saved at all costs. The power of the 
federal government increased tremendously during and after the Civil War. 
Supreme Court Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase said state sovereignty died at Ap- 
pomattox. 

In 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment was passed unconstitutionally. This act 
created a new class of citizenship. The Senate then consisted of 72 members, in- 
cluding 22 southerners. Since the Senate did not have the required 48 votes to pass 
the Fourteenth amendment, it would not seat the southerners. As a result, only 34 
votes were needed. However, they were still one vote short so, without a hearing, 
they illegally unseated a New Jersey senator who was against the amendment be- 
cause he had only been elected by a plurality. Such an election was legal in New 
Jersey and in other states so this act was illegal but the conspirators used this 
strategy because they did not have the required two-third vote needed to expel a 
seated senator. The Fourteenth Amendment was passed by 33 of 49 senators. In a 
similar manner, the House would not seat 58 southern representatives, so the 182 
northern members only needed 122 votes to pass the amendment. Although the 
vote was two short of the two-thirds required, the amendment was declared passed 
with 120 votes. 

By March, 1867 only 17 of 37 states had ratified the amendment. Then the 
Reconstruction Act was passed, legalizing military occupation of all southern 
states except Tennessee — which had approved the new amendment. Under the 
military occupation most southern whites lost the right to vote, and six southern 
states were forced to pass the Fourteenth Amendment. This insured that the 
required 29 states were reached. Although Ohio and New Jersey repealed their 
earlier approval, disgusted with these events, they were still counted and the 
amendment was ratified.' 

In Dyett v. Turner (1967) the Utah Supreme Court attacked the method by 
which the Fourteenth Amendment was passed. In State v. Phillips (1975) the Utah 
Supreme Court said: "No court in full possession of its faculties could honestly 
hold that the amendment (Fourteenth) was properly approved and adopted." The 
Fourteenth Amendment has been used to expand federal power "not only not 



68 Treason The New World Order 



granted to it, but expressly forbidden to it. ...History is strewn with other examples 
which demonstrate that undue, uncontrolled and unwieldy concentrations of power 
in any individual or institution tends to destroy itself. It is our opinion that this is 
the evil which the founders feared so keenly and tried so zealously to guard against, 
but which is now rife upon us." Although the Fourteenth Amendment has often 
been used to expand federal power, the Supreme Court has never ruled on its con- 
stitutionality. 

Until early this century people still felt primarily loyal to their state. The 
federal government was a distant body that had little direct impact on people's 
lives. This is a key reason why so many southerners left the Union during the 
Civil War. It is difficult for us to appreciate such state loyalty today. The federal 
government was greatly enhanced when the Sixteenth Amendment, to collect 
income taxes, was falsely passed in 1913. This directly linked the federal govern- 
ment to every taxpayer and gradually played a further role in weakening state 
sovereignty. 

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments strictly limit the federal government to 
those powers defined in the Constitution to protect state sovereignty and the 
people's rights. The evidence clearly shows that "the ratifying States regarded this 
statement of reserved powers as a vital, indeed an absolutely necessary addition to 
the Constitution.'" And the first article of the Constitution states: "All legislative 
Powers herein granted...." which means the federal government only has the 
powers granted to it by the Constitution. That these amendments have been 
greatly weakened in this century, in violation of the Constitution, is the heart of 
our problem. The federal government has a role to play but it should be strictly 
within the Constitution. 

Under the Constitution, the states agreed to give certain of their sovereign 
powers to the federal government. However, these few powers were specifically 
outlined with all other powers reserved to the states and the people. During the 
debate over ratifying the Constitution, this principle was widely understood, so 
many wondered in amazement how anyone could ever imagine that the federal 
government would usurp state sovereignty. Alexander Hamilton said in, The 
Federalist Papers, number 9: "The proposed Constitution so far from implying an 
abolition of the state governments, makes them constituent parts of the national 
sovereignty, by allowing them a direct representation in the Senate, and leaves in 
their possession certain exclusive and very important portions of sovereign 
power." In The Federalist Papers, number 17, Hamilton added: "Allowing the 
utmost latitude to the love of power which any reasonable man can require, I 
confess I am at a loss to discover what temptation the persons entrusted with the 
administration of the general (federal) government could ever feel to divest the 
states of the authorities of that description.... It will always be far more easy for 
the state governments to encroach upon the national authorities, than for the 
national government to encroach upon the state authorities." 

James Madison said in The Federalist Papers, number 45: "The state 
governments may be regarded as constituent and essential parts of the federal 
government; whilst the latter is nowise essential to the operation or organization 
of the former. ...The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal 
government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state govern- 
ments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on 
external objects, as war, peace, negotiations, and foreign commerce. ...The powers 



State Rights and the Federal Government 69 



reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary 
course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the 
internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the state." This hardly sounds like 
our present government. Leaving most powers including those undefined to the 
states and people and only a few defined powers to the federal government was a 
deliberate system of checks and balances to prevent the tyranny that is so common 
in concentrated government power. Today Washington has forgotten that the 
ultimate purpose of separate government powers is to protect the people from 
government tyranny. 

During the ratification debate in Virginia, Patrick Henry and George Mason 
opposed the new Constitution. Henry said: "Be extremely cautious, watchful, and 
jealous of your liberty. Instead of securing your rights, you may lose them 
forever. There will be no checks, no real balances, in this government.'" George 
Mason said having a central government "is totally subversive of every principle 
which has hitherto governed us. This power is calculated to annihilate totally the 
State governments. ...These two concurrent powers cannot exist long together; the 
one will destroy the other...." Mason was also very critical of the taxing power 
which he said "must carry everything before it.'" 

In 1816 Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The way to have good and safe government 
is not to trust it all to one, but to divide it among the many. ...Let the national 
government be entrusted with the defense of the nation and its foreign and federal 
relations; the state governments with the civil rights, laws, police and administra- 
tion of what concerns the state generally; the counties with the local concerns of 
the counties. ...What has destroyed the liberty and the rights of man in every 
government which has ever existed under the sun? The generalizing and concen- 
trating of cares and powers into one body.'" 

State and federal governments have legitimate functions, but the Constitution 
should be used as a guideline to set proper boundaries. This is rarely done today. 
The federal government has no legal authority to intervene in the affairs of states, 
except in the areas delegated under the Constitution. "The genius of the U.S. 
Constitution is that it's the world's only anti-government Constitution. The 
Founders understood clearly that the principle threat to the American people was 
then, and would always be, our own government.'" 

The states created a federal government partly because they found that a few 
issues such as diplomacy, interstate commerce, defense, and disputes among the 
states could best be settled by a national government. However, since the New 
Deal, it has been believed that all problems must be solved on a national level. 
The Constitution is supposed to be a system of restraints against the natural 
tendency of government to continue growing, but the federal government has gone 
way beyond its constitutional mandate; it has violated the rights of the states and 
the people. The New Deal represented a fundamental change in federal authority, 
but the Constitution was never changed to legalize this power. 

History has shown time and again how corrupting the influence of power can 
be. Edmund Burke said: "The greater the power the more dangerous the abuse." In 
1888 John Fiske, a Harvard historian, said: "If the day should ever arrive when the 
people of the different parts of our country shall allow their local affairs to be 
administered by prefects sent from Washington. ..on that day the progressive 
political career of the American people will have come to an end, and the hopes 



70 Treason The New World Order 



that have been built upon it for the future happiness and prosperity of mankind 
will be wrecked forever." 

Passage of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913 meant that senators were 
chosen in a general election instead of being elected by state legislatures. On a 
practical level, state legislators were much more able to see that senators protected 
state rights than is the case with voters involved in many varied activities. Federal 
programs like unfunded mandates would never have passed if senators were still 
elected by state legislators. The removal of this important protection established 
by the Founders played a major role in weakening state sovereignty. It is not by 
chance that the federal government grew so large in the years after this amendment 
was passed. 

It has been increasingly accepted that the federal government has a right and 
duty to exercise greater and greater power. This view represents "the first principle 
of totalitarianism: that the state is competent to do all things and is limited in 
what it actually does only by the will of those who control the state.'" The New 
Deal made people think that government was the source of our happiness. The 
federal government is supposed to be the agent of the states, but today it is the 
other way around. The federal government has gone from being a servant with few 
powers to a master with virtually unlimited power. The Constitution is ignored, 
the principle of limited government is forgotten, and great power has been trans- 
ferred to fewer people. "Like so many other nations before us, we may succumb 
through internal weakness rather than fall before a foreign foe."" 

The bureaucracy and executive branch have become much more powerful, 
while the legislature has conceded many of its powers, such as the power of the 
purse and declaration of war. Constitutional government has been replaced by bu- 
reaucratic decrees. There is a growing conflict between the people and the experts 
who make policy. These experts rarely reflect the real values and concerns of the 
American people. Yankelovich calls this "creeping expertism" and says "it under- 
mines the country's ability to reach consensus on how to resolve important 
issues." 10 Think tanks have narrowed the political debate using statistics to 
support any position. 

Administration has replaced electoral politics, and policy is decided in the 
executive bureaucracy. The bureaucracy is used by those who distrust the people as 
another layer to separate the ruling elite from the people. Alexis de Tocqueville 
called this "administrative despotism." Bureaucracy is undemocratic, because it 
rests on the belief that an expert's opinion has more value than a nonexpert's. 
Eugene McCarthy warned: "The only thing that saves us from bureaucracy is 
inefficiency. An efficient bureaucracy is the greatest threat to liberty." Too often 
local and state officials are overruled by federal bureaucrats who often think they 
are above the law. If constitutional government is restored, there must also be a 
serious debate about the role of bureaucracy and administrative law in our 
Republic. This is long overdue. Administrative agencies are not even described in 
the Constitution. 

Rep. J.D. Hayworth has introduced H.R. 2727, requiring that regulatory 
rulings would not take effect unless Congress voted for them. For too long 
legislative power has unconstitutionally shifted to administrative agencies." The 
public must become more involved and educated, while the bureaucrats must be 
more willing to listen and let people become involved in decisions. The experts 
and technocrats have encroached on the people's territory. This problem is one 



State Rights and the Federal Government 71 



more reason why fewer people vote. Whoever wins, few promises are kept and 
little changes. People increasingly understand that the bureaucrats and ruling elite 
make the decisions with little input from the people or regard for what they want. 

That people have wanted greater federal involvement in their lives weakened 
state rights. Only since the 1994 election has state rights again become a national 
priority. There has yet to be much discussion of the fact that the federalization of 
so many government functions has also greatly weakened the basic rights of the 
individual. People should understand that as they demand more aid from the federal 
government, it increasingly comes at a very heavy price — the loss of our 
freedoms. As a consequence of so many functions being federalized, we as a people 
have become far too dependent on the federal bureaucracy. We are being bribed into 
slavery! Fortunately people are awakening to this reality, and bringing federal 
projects to your district no longer guarantees reelection." 

A key part of the problem is that lobbyists represent millions of Americans, 
not just a few special interests. The entitlement programs represent about one- 
sixth of all personal income. The federal government has gotten too big partly 
because most people love entitlement programs. "The ultimate problem with all 
process reforms is that lobbies are us, and you cannot isolate a democratic 
government from its own society."" People must be willing to make fewer 
demands on government. That people think federal programs are free is a distorted 
view. Money for federal programs ultimately comes from the people, and an in- 
crease in federal programs promotes an increase in federal control over our lives. 

Reviving state rights is solidly grounded in our constitutional history. Under 
the Constitution the federal government doesn't have the authority to set up many 
of the programs that it has instituted in this century. It is remarkable that the 
federal government owns or controls one-third of all land in America. There are 
many federal programs that should be cancelled, consolidated, or transferred to the 
states. These programs include welfare, housing, energy, commerce, agriculture, 
education, environment, public power, and most forms of crime prevention. 

Limiting areas the federal government could regulate worked for 150 years, 
partly because the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce was nar- 
rowly interpreted. In 1895 the Supreme Court stopped federal regulation of sugar 
in U.S. v. E.C. Knight Co. because interstate commerce was narrowly affected. In 
1937, under pressure from Roosevelt, the Supreme Court used the commerce and 
general welfare clauses in Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution to expand the 
power of the federal government into many areas always reserved to the states. The 
general welfare clause was meant to limit federal spending; instead, especially 
since the New Deal, it has been used in just the opposite manner. It was meant to 
benefit the nation and people as a whole, such as in national defense, not to bene- 
fit individuals or special interest groups. In 1798 Thomas Jefferson said: 
"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only 
those specifically enumerated."" 

The first Agriculture Adjustment Act passed in 1933 under the general welfare 
clause of the Constitution was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 
U.S. v. Butler (1936). Congress responded by passing similar legislation under the 
guise of interstate commerce, and the Supreme Court declared this similar law 
constitutional in Wickard v. Filburn (1942). Filburn grew crops only for his 
family. The court said if a farmer had not used his own feed, he might have bought 
someone else's wheat, which might affect the price of wheat which was transported 



72 Treason The New World Order 



in interstate commerce. Henceforth the commerce clause was extended to cover 
what wasn't interstate or even commerce. Through such machinations our Consti- 
tution has been subverted by the courts and politicians. Previously, intrastate 
commerce only conducted within a state was left to the states to regulate. The 
Supreme Court had said that production is inherently local. 

Alexander Hamilton warned in The Federalist Papers, number 17: 
"Supervision of agriculture and of other concerns of a similar nature. ..which are 
proper to be provided for by local legislation, can never be desirable cares of a 
general jurisdiction. It is therefore improbable that there should exist a disposition 
in the Federal councils to usurp the powers with which they are connected; because 
the attempt to exercise those powers would be as troublesome as it would be 
nugatory." 

In recent years many federal environment, welfare, civil rights, and crime laws 
have passed using the commerce and general welfare clauses. In Heart of Atlanta 
Motel v. (7.5. the 1964 Civil Rights Act was upheld under the interstate 
commerce clause. Since 1965 the federal government has been using preemption 
statutes transferring entire areas of authority from the states to the federal author- 
ities, with national standards being established. While I strongly support the civil 
rights revolution, to continuously increase federal authority will ultimately cause 
our demise as a free people. As Time magazine noted, despite what the federal 
government likes us to believe, areas such as crime prevention and education are 
reserved to the states under the Constitution." 

After the Civil War, Congress gradually expanded federal criminal jurisdiction 
regarding federal agencies, such as activities involving interstate commerce. The 
Post Office Code of 1872 made it a crime to promote obscenity, fraud, or lotteries. 
In 1896 Congress provided funds to build the first federal prison. Only in this 
century have we seen a vast increase in federal crimes and the establishment of 
federal police such as the FBI. In 1910 it became a federal offense to take a woman 
across state lines for immoral purposes, and in 1919 transporting a stolen car 
across state lines became a federal crime. The 1994 crime bill placed under federal 
jurisdiction numerous acts involving drugs, guns, and juveniles that have tradi- 
tionally been controlled by state and local governments. Even car-jacking and child 
support are now federal concerns. 

Despite Clinton's "Mandate for Change" describing crime as an area in which 
"no federal role is justified," we got the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act 
of 1993 and the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Senator 
D'Amato and other Republicans call for more federal involvement in crime 
prevention while at the same time proclaiming that they are cutting the federal 
government. Senator Biden said on August 22, 1994, that under the Violence 
Against Women Act, which is part of the 1994 federal crime law, if officers do not 
make arrests in domestic violence cases, police department can lose federal funds; 
yet on the same day Senator Biden said Washington wasn't exerting control over 
local police. Senator Feingold voted against the 1994 crime bill saying "The 
architects of our nation purposely did not establish a national police force and 
largely left law enforcement as a state and local responsibility. ...Some members of 
this body are no longer committed to this aspect of federalism and local control. 
They apparently would have us federalize almost every crime that has made a 
headline anywhere in our nation." 



State Rights and the Federal Government 73 



Wilson Nicholas, a delegate to the Virginia convention that ratified the Con- 
stitution, said: "Congress has power to define and punish piracies, counterfeiting, 
and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the laws of nations; 
but they cannot define or prescribe the punishment of any other crime whatsoever 
without violating the Constitution." In Brown v. Maryland (1827) Chief Justice 
Marshall said: "The police power, unquestionably remains, and ought to remain, 
with the States." Until this century federal courts upheld the view that the federal 
government could only deal with crimes specifically mentioned in the Constitu- 
tion. In 1911 the Supreme Court said: "Among the powers of the State not 
surrendered — which powers therefore remain with the State — is the power to so 
regulate the relative rights and duties of all within its jurisdiction as to guard the 
public morals, the public safety, and the public health, as well as to promote the 
public convenience and the common good." At the founding of this Republic, 
there were only four federal crimes: treason, counterfeiting, piracy, and crimes 
against the laws of nations. Now there are 3,000 federal crimes, 300,000 federal 
administrative regulations, and about 85,000 local governments with 513,200 
elected officials, or one in every 500 people. Our Republic is being destroyed by 
thousands of laws and enforcers. 

While conservatives in Congress attack social-welfare spending programs as 
wasteful, no one in Congress proclaims that there is no authority under the 
Constitution to spend the people's money on the welfare state. Such spending is 
unconstitutional because the Constitution does not grant the federal government 
the authority to spend such money. In 1794 James Madison criticized aid to 
French refugees: "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the 
Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of 
benevolence, the money of their constituents." In 1854 President Franklin Pierce 
vetoed a bill for the mentally ill saying: "I cannot find any authority in the 
Constitution for public charity." To provide such financing would be "subversive 
to the whole theory upon which the Union of the States is founded." In the late 
1800s Congress increasingly appropriated money for veterans' pensions and public 
charity based on the "general welfare." President Grover Cleveland rejected hun- 
dreds of these bills saying, "I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the 
Constitution." I happen to support providing some public support for people in 
need, but it should only be done by the states. The federal government has no 
constitutional basis to provide such aid." 

Since the New Deal, states have had to rely on the federal government for 
money to run many programs. With most tax dollars going to the federal govern- 
ment, the states don't have the fiscal independence to serve their constituents and 
preserve their sovereignty. The power of taxation has been largely transferred to 
the federal government, with the important policies of the day established by 
Washington. By the 1960s states and cities generally received 25 percent of their 
funding from the federal government, which made it much easier for the federal 
government to dictate policy. If federal taxes were lowered, state taxes could be 
increased proportionally, per the wishes of the people so that people paid about the 
same taxes each year, depending on what programs the states established. The 
states would then have the funds to pay for many programs now being run by the 
federal government. For instance, if the U.S. Education Department was closed, it 
would be possible to calculate what that department was spending each year and 
then lower federal taxes based on that rate. Time should be allotted before these 



74 Treason The New World Order 



federal programs are closed, so people in each state could decide what federal 
programs they might want to establish and how much funding would be needed. 

Returning government to the states would ease the growing sense of 
alienation and loss of control over their lives that millions now feel. Thomas 
Hobbes said: "Freedom is government divided into small fragments." This shift 
back to the states would also be an effective means to restore the Constitution and 
prevent tyranny yet still assist people as they gradually get over the addiction of 
government aid. A weakened federal government would have less power to 
blackmail states into accepting more federal control or lose federal money. 

States are much better able to handle programs partly because they are closer 
to the people and are thus more efficient and responsive. Local authorities get 
faster feedback to improve programs. Local problems are better handled by local 
governments than by a distant federal bureaucracy, and states cannot create money 
so their potential for abusive powers is limited. Already many states have reformed 
their welfare rules with many improvements, and people are gradually being 
weaned off welfare. With such poor results from the huge sums spent for the war 
on poverty, it is time for a change." 

Returning many federal government activities to the states would weaken the 
power of the lobby groups. They would have to divide their resources for 50 
states. Various states could test different solutions and programs to see what 
worked best, and there would be more competition and variety. If one state be- 
comes too rigid, people and businesses can move to other states. New York and 
California, with high taxes, have made it difficult for businesses, so many 
companies have moved. 

Transferring certain federal powers back to the states is not a new idea. 
Presidents Eisenhower and Nixon formed commissions to study this. Eisenhower 
warned in the 1950s: "Those who would be free must stand eternal watch against 
concentration of power in government." He appointed the Kestenbaum Commis- 
sion to study ways federal programs and powers could be transferred to the states, 
but nothing was accomplished. When the Advisory Committee on Intergovern- 
mental Relations made a few proposals in 1969, again nothing was done. 

More recently this same committee suggested a three-part pragmatic test to 
determine which government should be involved in various programs. First, the 
federal government should not be involved in programs where there is a strong 
history of local involvement. Education and police enforcement exemplify this. 
Little of value is accomplished by federal intrusion in these areas. Second, what is 
the relative amount of federal financing in relation to total government spending? 
For instance, highway construction, law enforcement, and education receive far 
less money from the federal government than does welfare aid. Third, would ending 
federal aid cause destructive competition among the states? Should there be federal 
equalization of standards in some areas such as with environment or welfare laws, 
so that states with strict standards will not be punished when other states have lax 
standards? A fourth criterion is whether a particular program is really of national 
concern. Bruce Babbitt, currently Clinton's Secretary of the Interior, said in 1981, 
as governor of Arizona, "Congress ought to be worrying about arms control and 
defense instead of potholes in the street."" 

When Senator Kerry ran for president in 1992 he promised to reduce the 
number of cabinet posts by half and to reduce nonentitlement domestic spending 
by a quarter. Shortly before the 1994 elections, Utah governor Mike Leavitt said 



State Rights and the Federal Government 75 



"The common citizen may not use the term 'unfunded mandate,' but they know 
intuitively that the federal government is reaching beyond what was intended." In 
1992 the Brookings Institution published a book, Reviving the American Dream, 
by Alice M. Rivlin, who became deputy director of the Clinton Administration's 
Office of Management and Budget. She said "The federal government has taken on 
too much responsibility and should return some of its functions to the states. A 
clearer division of responsibilities between the states and the federal government 
could make both levels operate more effectively." The Republicans trounced the 
Democrats in the 1994 election partly because of a promise to diminish govern- 
ment. 

On November 6, 1994 CBS released a poll in which 63 percent of the public 
felt the federal government should be doing less for us and 30 percent felt that it 
should be doing more. We have to dismantle much of the federal government be- 
cause it has gotten too large, out of control, and distant from the people which it 
no longer represents. Not only would this be in accord with the Constitution, it 
would provide more effective government for individuals and many businesses and 
lessen the power of lobbyists. Americans must give up the idea that the federal 
government can solve all problems. 

When the Wall Street Journal reviewed the book, Lost Rights, the heading 
was "Fix Washington Before It Enslaves Us All."" Even this bastion of the 
establishment is getting the picture. A sad example of how ridiculous things have 
become was shown on the evening news in early December, 1994. Federal 
legislation will require cities to change most of their street signs so they are more 
legible to the Washington bureaucrats. Denver, for example, will have to spend $2 
million to satisfy this requirement. Allowing the federal government to interfere 
this much in our daily lives was never the intent of the Founders. If they under- 
stood that the federal government would one day control the shape of street signs 
there would never have been a federal government. 

There has been a move to restore more responsible representation by estab- 
lishing new local governments. In 1992 Staten Island voted overwhelmingly to 
secede from New York City. Nine counties in Kansas and parts of Texas, 
Colorado, and Oklahoma are trying to become a new state in Western Kansas. 
People in several regions of Washington state are trying to establish new counties, 
as that state's Constitution allows, and there is a move to divide California into 
three states for better representation. s ° 

State, local, and federal authorities should privatize and deregulate many 
government functions as many other countries have done in recent years. Private 
businesses can collect garbage more efficiently than the government, and tens of 
billions of dollars could be saved and earned by selling various federal agencies, 
such as Amtrak and low income housing. 21 Only recently did Congress agree to 
sell the helium reserve from the 1920s, although special interests assure us this 
reserve remains vital to national security. Deregulation of the trucking industry is 
expected to save up to $20 billion a year as the shipping industry is freed from the 
clutches of the ICC." 

There are often problems in distributing federal grant money. When the 
Justice Department recently awarded money to local communities to ease crime, 
Indianapolis lost to a suburb with a much lower crime rate. Politics, not local 
need and efficiency, too often decide federal grant money. This issue would remain 
a problem if states took over many federal programs, but state and local grants 



76 Treason The New World Order 



would receive closer scrutiny, and local officials would have a better understanding 
of local problems. 

In Demosclerosis, Jonathan Rauch describes how democracy is being weak- 
ened by an inability of government to act and make things work. "In principle, the 
U.S. government's situation is like the Soviet economy's. ...In both, the method 
of trial and error reached the point of critical failure. In Washington, old programs 
and policies cannot be gotten rid of, and yet they continue to suck up money and 
energy. As a result, there is less and less money or energy for new programs and 
policies." 2 ' 

Every federal program takes on a life of its own, so it will be extremely 
difficult to transfer power from the federal government to the states. It is difficult 
to change, much less kill or transfer, a federal program once it has been 
established, even after it has served its usefulness. We will only reverse the trend 
towards greater federal power when we elect people who want to rid themselves of 
the power they have been given. The New Deal view of an all-powerful, benef- 
icient central government must be replaced with a return to federalism and a 
separation of powers. 

Gradually states are taking more aggressive action to curtail the federal gov- 
ernment. California and 21 other states passed a resolution asserting state 
sovereign rights under the Tenth Amendment. The California joint resolution 44 
said: "Whereas, the scope of power defined by the 10th Amendment means that the 
federal government was created by the States specifically to be an agent of the 
States; and Whereas, In the year 1994 the States are demonstrably treated as agents 
of the federal government; and. ..whereas, Many federal mandates are directly in 
violation of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the U.S." The resolution 
also demanded that the federal government immediately stop mandates that are 
beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers. Similar resolutions have 
been introduced in most other states. 

A more radical solution has been proposed by the Committee of 50 states 
which is chaired by former Utah governor J. Bracken Lee. The goal is to get 38 
states to pass the Ultimate Resolution so if Congress allows the national debt to 
reach six trillion dollars, or if Congress or the president by any means including 
by Executive Order (EO) ever attempt to abolish or suspend the Constitution, then 
the Union will automatically be dissolved back to 50 sovereign states. By 1996 
the national debt had reached over five trillion dollars. 

The objective is not to actually dissolve the Union but to establish the legal 
principle that this power will automatically exist to be exercised if the federal 
government goes too far in removing our rights. For instance, if the president 
signed an Executive Order declaring martial law and removing all guns from the 
people or restricting travel, this resolution would automatically take hold, if 
approved and the federal government would be dissolved. In such a situation this 
solution would be far more effective and necessary than nullification. By March, 
1994 this resolution had been introduced in nine states; it missed passing in the 
Arizona House by a 27-26 vote. There have already been two sanctioned instances 
of secession — West Virginia was formed out of Virginia, and Vermont from New 
Hampshire." 

The Sovereignty Resolution calls for Congress to use its constitutional 
mandate (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5) to provide interest free loans of up to 
$360 billion over four years to local tax-supported bodies to pay current debts and 



State Rights and the Federal Government 77 



to finance capital projects. This would create many jobs, help local businesses, 
improve the economy, and restore the deteriorating infrastructure. By January 1, 
1996 this had been endorsed by 3,295 local governments including the U.S. 
Conference of Mayors and the Michigan legislature. As usual the corporate- 
controlled press won't discuss this resolution despite its growing popularity. 
Banks would earn no interest under this plan." 

After the large corporations, the greatest factor causing the end of constitu- 
tional government in America has been judicial tyranny by federal judges. Thomas 
Jefferson said: "It is a very dangerous doctrine to consider the judges as the 
ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions. It is one which would place us 
under the despotism of an oligarchy." Federal judges will inevitably increase 
federal power. The Supreme Court has gone from being an arbitrator of con- 
stitutional questions to protecting the power of the corporations and the federal 
government, especially the executive branch. In Dyett v. Turner (1967) the Utah 
Supreme Court said: "The U.S. Supreme Court. ..has departed from the Constitu- 
tion as it has been interpreted from its inception and has followed the urgings of 
social reformers. ...It has amended the Constitution in a manner unknown to the 
document itself... The federal courts have arrogated unto themselves the powers 
and duties which rightfully belong to the state courts." 

Increasingly in the last 100 years, powerful corporate interests have delib- 
erately subverted the intent of the Founders by appointing judges who would 
enhance corporate and federal power and weaken the constitutional system of 
checks and balances. While many today attack the New Deal as representing the 
demise of constitutional government in America, this attack really began in the 
late 1800s, when the federal courts led by the Supreme Court started destroying 
state sovereignty and allowed the federal government to take over numerous duties 
and responsibilities that under the Constitution had been left to the people and the 
states. States did not turn to the Supreme Court to leave the Union before the 
Civil War partly because the Constitution does not grant federal courts the right to 
control state sovereignty. The Constitution did not create judicial supremacy, and 
there is extensive evidence that the Founders never granted the Supreme Court the 
power to rule over the president, Congress, or the states." 

Congress should reaffirm the Tenth Amendment, and courts should be in- 
structed to not preempt state or local authority unless specifically permitted by the 
Constitution. Congress, as it did after the Civil War per the Constitution, Article 
III, Section 2, should specifically limit the jurisdiction of courts to act in ways 
that limit state sovereignty." On September 6, 1995 Rep. John Shadegg intro- 
duced H.R. 2270, while Senator Spencer Abraham introduced a similar bill in the 
Senate, requiring Congress to identify the constitutional authority for all bills. 

In U.S. v. Conner the court found invalid the Anti Car Theft Act of 1992 
because the Feds had no authority under the interstate commerce clause to extend 
its authority here. This decision was reversed by the Sixth Circuit Court of 
Appeals. In 1988 Congress passed the Indian Gambling Regulation Act to regulate 
gambling on Indian reservations. Three courts found this violated the Tenth 
Amendment, but they were reversed by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals." 
These appeals judges should be impeached and fired. 

Several recent Supreme Court decisions offer some hope, but it is too early to 
tell if the court is determined to enforce the Tenth Amendment and support state 
sovereignty. The Supreme Court in New York v. U.S. (1992) supported New 



78 Treason The New World Order 



York, which refused to accept radioactive waste, because New York was a 
sovereign state protected under the Tenth Amendment. The court said "Congress 
cannot commandeer the legislative or regulatory processes of the states" and the 
"Constitution divides authority between federal and state governments for the 
protection of individuals." 

In U.S. v. Lopez (1995) the Supreme Court ruled that the federal Gun-Free 
School Zones Act was unconstitutional. Congress had no right to decide that it 
was illegal for schools to allow guns in or near schools. This was a clear misuse 
of the commerce clause and a gross overextension of federal powers. In the 
decision lustice Thomas wisely warned: "The substantial effects test suffers from 
the further flaw that it appears to grant Congress a police power over the nation." 
The government told the court it could not even list any limits to federal govern- 
ment power under the commerce clause. An observer in Forbes magazine warned, 
if there are no limits to the power of the federal government then "we have a 
totalitarian state."" Amazingly, the dissenting justices said the court cannot go 
against the main views of public opinion. Apparently they haven't yet seen the 
1994 election results. Clinton was horrified at this decision saying: "I am deter- 
mined to keep guns out of our schools." He instructed the attorney general to find 
a way around this court ruling, again showing his contempt for the Constitution. 
Forty states already have laws preventing guns near schools. 

Many want to maintain federal authority. The New York Times said, in 
response to this decision, to weaken congressional power would be a return "to the 
misguided rulings of earlier times." One member of Congress said this ruling 
could invalidate hundreds of federal laws. That is just the point! The commerce and 
general welfare clauses have been misused since 1937 to break with 150 years of 
constitutional government. Before 1937 the Tenth Amendment curtailed federal 
power. The Supreme Court has played a major role in severely damaging our sys- 
tem of constitutional checks and balances. Hopefully, this will now be reversed. 
Federal judges in 1994 told Congress it was improper to federalize many crimes. 

Instead of the states deciding what powers will be delegated to the Feds, the 
federal government and courts have taken many powers from the people and states, 
which completely violates the Constitution and the stated wishes of the Founding 
Fathers. Yet the Washington politicians wonder why they are held in such 
contempt by the people. Tocqueville warned against the habit of centralization and 
the survival of a free people. He said: "I am of the opinion that a centralized 
administration is fit only to enervate the nations in which it exists, by incessantly 
diminishing their local spirit."" 

None of the original 13 States would have ratified the U.S. Constitution if 
the people understood that the federal government would someday have such 
tremendous power. We must encourage competition among the sovereign states 
and protect the rights of individuals to limit government and prevent tyranny and 
monopoly power. This will also weaken the influence of interest group politics." 
If the federal government cannot be significantly disbanded, we should start over 
with 50 sovereign states keeping the Constitution, making some slight adjust- 
ments as the people desire and try for a fourth time to establish a federation among 
the states — being more careful to control a new federal government and to protect 
the rights of the people and the sovereign states. 



79 



Chapter VII 
Early Signs of Treason 



"Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the 
past." 

George Orwell 

"The pretense of objectivity conceals the fact that all history, while recalling the 
past, serves some present interest." 

Howard Zinn 



There are numerous incidents in the 20th century that show how dangerous 
the bankers and corporate elite are. Carroll Quigley described how international 
financiers worked behind the scenes in many conflicts influencing governments 
and making deals. The Laurence Boothe Papers at the Hoover Institution document 
how, in return for economic concessions, Wall Street assisted the 1912 rebellion 
of Sun Yat-sen in China. The corporate elite have fomented many rebellions and 
wars. To the ruling elite war is just another means to increase power and profits. 

During and after World War I numerous bankers, corporate leaders, and 
government officials provided assistance and millions of dollars to place the 
communists, and later Hitler and Mussolini, into power. Some apologists have 
claimed that money was only given to the communists to keep Russia in the war 
against Germany during the first world war, but the evidence clearly refutes this 
view. These financiers also supported the anti-communists, like Admiral Kolchak 
in Siberia. It was important to support both sides to insure future profits. Some of 
the financiers supporting the communists, like Thomas Lamont head of the 
Morgan banking group, also supported the fascists. 

While various authorities such as Gary Allen have discussed this interaction, 
Antony Sutton from the Hoover Institution at Stanford University has provided 
the most irrefutable and detailed evidence of this alliance in several books, espe- 
cially in Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler and Wall Street and the Bolshevik 
Revolution, using U.S. State Department documents, congressional reports, 
released archives such as from the Nuremberg trials, and newspaper reports. Sutton 
spoke before the Republican platform committee in 1972, but his news conference 
was cancelled, and when he returned to the Hoover Institute he was ordered to not 
make any public statements and his contract with the Hoover Institute was not 
renewed. 

The Rockefeller-controlled Chase Bank (later Chase Manhattan Bank) helped 
finance the Bolsheviks as did Lord Milner, head of the London Round Table, a 
member of the British cabinet, and director of a London bank. The Washington 
Post on February 2, 1918 said William B. Thompson, a director of the Federal 



80 Treason The New World Order 



Reserve Bank of New York, gave the Bolsheviks one million dollars to spread 
their doctrine. On October 17, 1918 William L. Saunders, deputy chairman of the 
Federal Reserve Bank of New York, wrote to President Wilson "I am in sympathy 
with the Soviet form of government as that best suited for the Russian people...." 
John Reed, a communist, worked for the Metropolitan magazine which was con- 
trolled by Morgan. Jacob Schiff, head of the New York bank Kuhn, Loeb & 
Company, heavily financed President Wilson's 1912 election. On February 3, 
1949 the New York Journal- American said: "Today it is estimated, even by Jacob's 
grandson, John Schiff, a prominent member of New York society, that the old 
man sank about $20 million for the final triumph of Bolshevism in Russia. Other 
New York banking firms also contributed." Jacob Schiff helped found the Council 
on Foreign Relations. 

Much of this nefarious activity took place from 120 Broadway in New York 
City. A few of the parties based at this address included: the New York Federal 
Reserve, GE, Guaranty Trust Co., Franklin Roosevelt, and the first Soviet 
ambassador to the U.S. The first Soviet bank was controlled by Morgan with its 
Guaranty Trust Company the U.S. agent. American International Corporation, 
founded in 1915 by Morgan interests and located at 120 Broadway, played a key 
role in supporting the Bolshevik revolution, and later some of its directors such as 
Arthur Lehman and Pierre Du Pont supported Roosevelt. 

On March 24, 1917 the New York Times revealed that Schiff had financed the 
distribution of revolutionary literature to 50,000 Russian military prisoners cap- 
tured during the Russian-Japanese war. The Times article quoted a later telegram 
from Schiff in which he said: Trotsky was "what we had hoped and striven for 
these long years." In January, 1916 Schiff arranged to bring Trotsky to the U.S. 
Trotsky entered the U.S. without a passport and was then given a U.S. passport to 
get back to Russia.' There was an international warrant for his arrest, and when he 
was detained in Canada, U.S. authorities got him released. In the June, 1919 issue 
of MacLean's, J.B.MacLean said Trotsky was released "at the request of the British 
Embassy at Washington. ..and that the Embassy acted on the request of the U.S. 
State Department, who was acting for someone else.'" In The Road to Safety, 
Arthur Willert, Washington correspondent for the London Times, said Colonel 
House, chief aide to President Wilson, told him President Wilson wanted Trotsky 
released. He conveyed this request to the British government. Because Canada and 
England wanted to keep Russia in the war, it was not in their interest to allow 
Trotsky to get back to Russia to help end the war. When Trotsky returned to 
Russia, he learned that Max Warburg, the Hamburg banker, had granted him funds 
in a Swedish bank. This credit helped finance the Russian revolution.' De Witt C. 
Poole, the American charge d'affairs in Archangel, Russia, quit because Wilson 
continued supporting the Bolsheviks. With American troops in Russia supposedly 
to stop communism those who understood what was really happening were quite 
angry. 

In The Intimate Papers of Colonel House, Charles Seymour said House was 
able "to prevent the formulation of a policy, demanded by certain groups among 
the French and British, of assisting the anti-Bolshevik factions in Russia." The 
U.S. illegally gave loans to the Soviet Union partly through the Federal Reserve 
bank. Individuals like Averell Harriman and companies like Standard Oil of New 
Jersey actively negotiated trade arrangements with the communists, while banks 
like the Chase National gave loans to the Soviet Union. 4 Sutton spent 10 years 



Early Signs of Treason 81 



researching Technology and Soviet Economic Development. He also wrote 
National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union and The Best Enemy Money 
Can Buy documenting how certain Western corporations and financiers built the 
economy of the Soviet empire. In June, 1944 Averell Harriman, then ambassador 
to the Soviet Union, in a report to the State Department, quoted Stalin as saying 
that about two-thirds of all large enterprises built in the Soviet Union had been 
built with U.S. aid. This pattern continues today, as a vast amount of advanced 
technology is being quietly transferred to China, partly through Secretary of 
Defense William Perry's business tics and the U.S. Patent Office.' 

Early this century the corporate elite infiltrated the right and left in America. 
The Guaranty Trust Company helped found the anti-Soviet United Americans. On 
March 28, 1920 the New York Times, quoting the United Americans, warned of a 
Soviet invasion of America within two years. Before World War I the Morgan 
bank also infiltrated domestic left-wing political groups." "It must be recognized 
that the power that these energetic Left-wingers exercised was never their own 
power or Communist power but was ultimately the power of the international 
financial coterie...." 7 Oswald Spengler said, in Decline of the West: "There is no 
proletarian, not even a Communist movement, that has not operated in the 
interests of money, in the direction indicated by money, and for the time being 
permitted by money...." It was easy to exercise this control because these groups 
needed money and wanted to influence the people. The purpose was to keep 
informed as to the thinking of radical groups, provide a mouthpiece so they could 
blow off steam, and be in a position to veto their actions especially if they became 
too radical. Morgan money established The New Republic. Waller Lippmann, an 
early recruit of the London Round Table Group, became a widely influential 
reporter who was used to direct American public opinion. 

Although much of this history has been cleansed, as suggested by the accom- 
panying cartoon, early in this century many Americans understood this corporate 
communist interaction. This was done, not because of a belief in these ideologies, 
but to gain monopolistic control over foreign markets, to create wars for more 
profits, and to progress towards a one world government. Sutton said: "Revolution 
and international finance are not at all inconsistent if the result of revolution is to 
establish more centralized authority."" The radical left, especially the communists, 
supported greater government control which was in alignment with the corporate 
elites move towards a one world government. The view that capitalists and 
communists are enemies is a fraud perpetuated to hide the fact that both groups 
have long worked together. When Trotsky died, Foreign Affairs said: "He gave us, 
in a time when our race is woefully in need of such restoratives, the vision of a 
man. Of that there is no more doubt than of his great place in history.'" In an 11- 
page salute, the lords of Wall Street bid farewell to comrade Trotsky. International 
communism was created by the bankers to enslave the masses. Few scholars 
acknowledge, this partly because universities and think tanks often get money 
from the banks and corporations that committed this treason. C.B. Dall in FDR, 
My Exploited Father-in-Law is one of the few sources to discuss this interaction. 

James and Suzanne Pool, in Who Financed Hitler, describes how wealthy 
businessmen from the U.S. and various European countries financed Hitler's rise 
to power. Many of the German firms that supported Hitler were linked to U.S. and 
other foreign corporations. Most of the directors of U.S. subsidiaries in Germany 
strongly supported Hitler. In the 1920s and 1930s, Wall Street and firms like GE 



82 Treason The New World Order 

"DEE*UGHTED'" 




Cartoon by Robert Minor in St. Louis Post-Dispatch (1911). Karl Marx 
surrounded by an appreciative audience of Wall Street financiers: 
John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, John D. Ryan of National City 
Bank, and Morgan partner George W. Perkins. Immediately behind 
Karl Marx is Teddy Roosevelt, leader of the Progressive Party. 



Cartoon used: by Robert Minor in 1911 for St. Louis Post-Dispatch 



Early Signs of Treason 83 



and Ford provided money and technical aid to develop German and Italian industry. 
New York bankers like J. P. Morgan and Kuhn, Loeb and Co. helped Mussolini 
solidify power. German munitions firms like I.G. Farben could not have developed 
their extensive war capacity without this foreign aid. On the board of directors of 
I.G. Farben, which produced the gas used in the death camps, were Henry Ford, 
Paul Warburg, a New York banker, and Charles E. Mitchell of the Federal Reserve 
Bank of New York. William Dodd, U.S. Ambassador to Germany, reported on the 
interaction of U.S. industrialists with the Nazis in Ambassador Dodd's Diary, 
1933-1938. This aid was planned and deliberate. The scholar Gabriel Kolko said: 
"The business press (in the U.S.) was aware from 1935 on, that German prosper- 
ity was based on war preparations. More important, it was conscious of the fact 
that German industry was under the control of the Nazis and was being directed to 
serve Germany's rearmament...." 10 This interaction was part of the deliberate plan 
to establish a financial system of world control that Carroll Quigley described in 
Tragedy and Hope. 

In the 1930s many Wall Street and media interests, such as the Hearst 
newspapers, supported fascism. The July, 1934 issue of Fortune was devoted to 
glorifying Italian fascism saying: "Fascism is achieving in a few years or decades 
such a conquest of the spirit of man as Christianity achieved only in ten cen- 
turies. ...The good journalist must recognize in Fascism certain ancient virtues of 
the race.... Among these are Discipline, Duty, Courage, Glory, Sacrifice." Promi- 
nent newspapers like the Chicago Tribune, New York Times, and the Wall Street 
Journal praised Mussolini for bringing stability and prosperity to Italy." In 
January, 1933 the New York Times editorialized under the banner "The Tamed 
Hitler" that there would soon be a "transformation" in Hitler as he started 
"softening down or abandoning. ..the more violent parts of his alleged program." 
For years numerous scare stories attacked the communist threat, but the press saw 
fascism as a stabilizing factor. In 1983 the Boston Globe described how the 
American press supported Hitler." 

The corporate elite saw fascism and the supposed reforms of Hitler and 
Mussolini as a way to preserve capitalism and increase their wealth and control 
over society. They created the conditions that led to the New Deal to limit 
competition and enhance economic and political control. In 1936 in I'm For 
Roosevelt Joseph Kennedy said "an organized functioning society requires a 
planned economy. ...Otherwise, there results a haphazard and inefficient method of 
social control." There were many similarities between the New Deal and Hitler's 
four year plan, and both were supported by the same industrialists. People like 
Putzi served as intermediaries between Wall Street, Washington, and the Nazis to 
coordinate and promote their common policies. 1 ' 

Sutton studied many sources, including archives from the Roosevelt library, 
and has documented in Wall Street and FDR many of Roosevelt's activities. While 
history tells use FDR was a man of the people, he was actually a creature of Wall 
Street. Since the late 1700s the Roosevelt family has been involved in banking. In 
the 1920s FDR held 11 corporate directorships, two law partnerships, and was 
president of a major trade association. During this period he often used question- 
able politics for economic gain; yet few historians have discussed his extensive 
business activities. He worked closely with many unsavory elements on Wall 
Street who supported the Nazis and communists, and many of these corporate 
interests also helped Roosevelt. This nefarious interaction with the Council on 



84 Treason The New World Order 



Foreign Relations (CFR) and one-worlders is often discussed by C.B. Dall in 
FDR, My Exploited Father-in-Law. Waller Teagle of the Federal Reserve Bank of 
New York helped the Nazis and worked in Roosevelt's National Recovery Admin- 
istration (NRA). Roosevelt supporters Bernard Baruch and his aide, NRA head 
Hugh Johnson, were based at 120 Broadway. GE, a financial backer of the 
communists and Nazis, actively promoted the New Deal. 

The NRA originated with the Swope Plan which was developed by Gerald 
Swope, president of GE. It also had its origins with Bernard Baruch and the 1915 
U.S. War Industries Board." The NRA established centralized corporate and gov- 
ernment control over industry. Henry Harriman, president of the Chamber of 
Commerce, called the NRA a "Magna Charta of industry and labor" and said there 
must be a "planned national economy." The large corporations wanted government 
intervention to prevent competition. Hoover refused to support the Swope Plan 
because of it fascist nature, so Wall Street turned against him. People like Sena- 
tors Wagner, Borah, and Gore were not fooled, and they attacked the plan as a scam 
to give the large corporations control of the nation's wealth." Historians will one 
day understand that Hoover was right when he called the New Deal a "fascist 
measure." Fortunately, the NRA was a failure and was found unconstitutional by 
the Supreme Court in 1935. 

When the NRA floundered, the corporate elite turned to a second plan to 
establish a dictatorship. They were aware that Hitler and Mussolini had used 
veterans' groups to take power. In the early 1930s General Butler was the most 
popular general in the U.S., especially among the veterans, because he was tireless 
in his efforts on their behalf. Butler had the gift to speak without notes and keep 
an audience spellbound. He had served in the Marine Corps for 33 years, being 
posted overseas on 12 expeditions, and had received the Congressional Medal of 
Honor twice, one of only four men to be so honored. He retired in 1930 as a major 
general in the Marines. In 1933 a Wall Street bond trader, Gerald MacGuire, 
approached General Butler gradually revealing plans to make him head of the 
American Legion (AL) and create an army of 500,000 veterans to lake control of 
the government. Van Zandt head of the Veterans of Foreign Wars said he was also 
approached by the plotters. The Du Ponts controlled the Remington Arms Com- 
pany which was to supply arms to the veterans' army. Butler was perhaps the one 
officer in the U.S. who could have recruited thousands of veterans, which is why 
the corporate elite tried to use him. The AL was established in 1919 by rich 
officers including Grayson Murphy, the boss of MacGuire. Into the 1930s it was 
controlled and used by big business especially to control the unions. 

Butler was pressured to lead a new organization which appeared in September, 
1934 called the American Liberty League. Officials in the league included John W. 
Davis, Democratic presidential candidate in 1924, and Al Smith former, governor 
of New York and Democratic presidential candidate in 1928. In the early 1930s, 
Davis was chief attorney for the Morgan Bank, while Smith worked for the Du 
Pont family. Smith attacked the Roosevelt reforms, even stating in 1936 that the 
New Deal was guiding the nation into communism. Other members of the league 
included the Mellon group, Rockefeller group, and the Pitcairn family. According 
to the Scripps-Howard press and its UPI wire service, one of the few pro- 
Roosevelt organs of the national press, leaders of the league were also executives 
with U.S. Steel, GM, Standard Oil (now Exxon), Chase National Bank, Goodyear 
Tire, and Mutual Life Insurance. Several groups openly associated with the league 



Early Signs of Treason 85 



were fascist, anti-labor, and anti-Semitic. 1 " The Du Ponts financed various Ameri- 
can fascist groups such as the American Liberty League, Clark's Crusaders, and the 
Black Legion, which was fanatically against blacks and Jews. 

Butler remained completely loyal to the Constitution, listening to the trea- 
sonous plot to gather evidence and learn who was behind it. After the charges of a 
plot were made public, Congress held an investigation, although only three people 
testified. Paul French, a reporter for the Philadelphia Record and New York 
Evening Post, had gained MacGuire's confidence and he supported Butler's testi- 
mony. French even quoted MacGuire as reporting that someone on Wall Street 
with $700 million planned to create an army in the Civilian Conservation Corps. 
This was a third back-up plan to seize the country. MacGuire also testified but was 
caught in numerous lies. Butler implicated people with LP. Morgan, the Rocke- 
fellers, GM, E.F. Hutton, and General MacArthur, who was a son-in-law to a 
Morgan partner." It is not certain if MacArthur was involved in the plot although 
some of his aides like George Van Horn Moseley and Charles Willoughby attacked 
the Jewish influence and had strong fascist leanings." MacArthur called the plot 
"the best laugh story of the year." 

After French published stories about the plot, there was public concern partly 
because powerful people named in the plot were not even called before Congress to 
testify. When Thomas Lamont of the Morgan Bank returned from Europe he told 
reporters "Perfect moonshine! Too utterly ridiculous to comment upon!" This was 
the typical way the plotters responded. Remember this point. In the future if 
prominent politicians and respected businessman are accused of treason, however 
detailed and reliable the charges, it will be denied. 

Although Congress did a poor investigation, the investigating committee on 
February 15, 1935 said it found evidence "verifying completely the testimony of 
General Butler. ...There is no question that these attempts were discussed, were 
planned, and might have been placed in execution when and if the financial backers 
deemed it expedient."" Unfortunately, Congress took no action against the plot- 
ters because it was too late. The large corporations already controlled all the levers 
of power. Not only did Congress refuse to get testimony from various corporate 
leaders involved in the plot, some of General Butler's and Paul French's testimony, 
especially concerning the involvement of corporate leaders, was suppressed in the 
released reports. Along with Congress, the White House also suppressed corporate 
involvement in the plot."' Despite the concern of many, the mass media belittled 
the plot. "The largely anti-Roosevelt press of the New Deal era scotched the story 
as expeditiously as possible by outright suppression, distortion, and attempts to 
ridicule General Butler's testimony as capricious fantasy." 51 On Dec 3, 1934 Time 
magazine in an article entitled "Plot Without Plotters" ridiculed the plot." The 
Nation and the New Republic said fascism comes from pseudoradical mass move- 
ments so Butler's revelations of a Wall Street plot was not a worry. 

Fortunately, Butler's full testimony was published by a reporter, John Spivak, 
and by George Seldes when the investigating committee accidently gave Spivak 
the complete version. In 1967 Spivak wrote A Man in His Time. He said: "What 
was behind the plot was shrouded in a silence which has not been broken to this 
day. Even a generation later, those who are still alive and know all the facts have 
kept their silence so well that the conspiracy is not even a footnote in American 
histories." He was also concerned that the committee refused to call the wealthy 
conspirators before it and was angry that nothing was done after Congress con- 



86 Treason The New World Order 



firmed this treason. Spivak said the plot failed because "though those involved had 
astonishing talents for making breathtaking millions of dollars, they lacked an 
elementary understanding of people and the moral forces that activated them."" 

George Seldes discussed the plot in Facts and Fascism, in his newsletter In 
fact, and in One Thousand Americans, he said: "There was one of the most repre- 
hensible conspiracies of silence in the long history of American journalism." 
About these events in the 1930s House speaker McCormack said: "The (New 
York) Times is the most slanting newspaper in the world. ...They brainwash the 
American people."" The national media cannot be trusted to educate and protect the 
rights of the people. Jules Archer in The Plot to Seize the White House has 
preserved the records of this plot, and many of these events from the 1930s are 
also discussed in The Revolt of the Conservatives by George Wolfskill. 

General Butler strongly attacked the role of big business in national affairs. 
On August 21, 1931 he said: "I spent 33 years. ..being a high-class muscle man 
for big business, for Wall Street and the bankers. ...I helped make Mexico. ..safe for 
American oil interests in 1916. ...I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for 
the national City (Bank) boys to collect revenue in. ...I helped in the rape of half a 
dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. ...Looking back 
on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints." He accused big business of 
causing U.S. entry into the first world war and said, on WCAU radio in Phil- 
adelphia, that his military expeditions overseas were "the raping of little nations to 
collect money for big industries" that had large foreign investments. Butler wrote 
War Is A Racket declaring that war "is conducted for the benefit of the very few at 
the expense of the masses. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes. ...Newly 
acquired territory promptly is exploited by the. ..self-same few who wring dollars 
out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill." Butler told Spivak 
"War is a racket to protect economic interests, not our country, and our soldiers are 
sent to die on foreign soil to protect investments by big business." If General 
Butler were alive today, the recent invasion of Haiti and Mexican loan guarantee 
would have shown him that nothing has changed. 

Roosevelt did not have the plotters arrested partly because of his intimate ties 
with these people. Certain plotters supported Roosevelt and many of them, such 
as the Du Ponts and Remington Arms had offices at 120 Broadway, which was 
described above. That Davis and Smith, two of the conspirators, had been demo- 
cratic presidential candidates in the 1920s also did not encourage Roosevelt to 
expose the plot. "There is strong evidence to suggest that the conspirators may 
have been too important politically, socially, and economically to be brought to 
justice after their scheme had been exposed...." 2 ' While Roosevelt's exact role in 
the plot has never been delineated, that he refused to investigate the plot, even after 
Congress concluded that it was real, means that he violated his oath of office to 
defend the Constitution. 

That no action was taken against any of the plotters was an extremely danger- 
ous precedent. They should have been arrested and tried for treason and sedition and 
received long prison sentences if found guilty. Instead they were allowed to con- 
tinue their treasonous acts, which helped cause World War II and the present 
dangerous situation that we now have in America. This could have been stopped in 
the 1930s. Corporate influence in our society today makes it impossible to find 
this plot discussed in any school history books, although in 1977 Hollywood did a 



Early Signs of Treason 87 



movie The November Plan on the plot. General Butler is one of the great unsung 
heroes of our Republic. 

Butler's charges against big business were strengthened when the Nye Com- 
mittee investigated the influence of the armament industry and bankers to draw the 
U.S. into World War I. Between 1934 and 1936 this committee held numerous 
hearing that described the great profits the munitions industries and financiers made 
from the war. 2 ' Wall Street helped finance most U.S. trade with the allies from 
1915 to 1917. Bankers like J. P. Morgan testified and Senator Nye said: "The 
record of facts makes it altogether fair to say that these bankers were in the heart 
and center of a system that made our going to war inevitable." The committee 
issued seven reports in 1935 and 1936 declaring that while evidence did "not show 
that wars have been started solely because of the activities of munitions makers 
and their agents" it was "against the peace of the world for selfishly interested 
organizations to be left free to goad and frighten nations into military activity."" 

Andre Tardieu, Ambassador to the U.S. and later French Prime Minister, 
wrote France and America and said American loans to the allies made a U.S. 
victory essential for America." New York Mayor Fiorello H. La Guardia said: 
"Wars are directed by bankers." Antibusiness sentiment was extremely strong, and 
these hearings were hugely popular, making headlines around the world. News 
analyst Raymond Swing expressed the view of most Americans when he said "It is 
almost a truism that the U.S. went into the World War in part to save from ruin 
the bankers who had strained themselves to the utmost to supply Great Britain and 
France with munitions and credits.""' Today these hearings are almost totally for- 
gotten because they have been removed from our history. 

General Butler was not the only individual who attacked the bankers. After 
Governor Huey Long became a senator, he called for a redistribute of wealth in 
America. In various congressional speeches Long attacked the power of Morgan 
and Rockefeller and this secret ruling class. 10 In April, 1932 he said the supposed 
plan by the government to soak the rich was really "a campaign to save the 
rich. ...Unless we provide for the redistribution of wealth in this country, the 
country is doomed; there is going to be no country left here very long." On May 
26, 1933 Long called for an investigation of the influence of the J. P. Morgan 
banking empire on the Roosevelt administration. He also said our involvement in 
the Spanish-American War and World War I were murderous frauds perpetrated to 
support Wall Street, which hated and feared him. 

In February, 1934 on national radio Long inaugurated a Share Our Wealth 
Society to redistribute wealth in America. In the midst of the depression this 
program was hugely popular. By 1935 there were 27,431 Share Our Wealth clubs 
existing in every state with at least 4,684,000 members. Long was extremely 
popular, with a powerful political base in the South. As many were aware, he had 
decided to run for president in 1936, establishing a third party, since he expected 
Roosevelt to get the Democratic nomination. He might have won or perhaps have 
thrown the election to the Republicans. A secret poll revealed that Long, as a third 
party candidate would get three to four million votes and that he would seriously 
weaken the Democratic party in many states." Long represented a direct political 
threat to the corporate elite which had to be dealt with. On August 9, 1935 Long, 
in Washington, discussed a plot to kill him. He was shot September 8, 1935 and 
died a few days later. There were charges of a conspiracy but solid proof was never 



Treason The New World Order 



provided." In 1939 two critics of Long said Washington knew about the assassi- 
nation in advance.' 1 

On November 23, 1937 GM and Du Pont representatives met with Nazi lead- 
ers in Boston and signed an agreement aligning GM and Du Pont with Germany. 
The goals were to defeat Roosevelt in the next election, remove Jewish influence 
in America, and place an American fuhrer in the White House. A secretary at the 
meeting sent a copy of the secret agreement to George Seldes, and he published it 
in his newsletter In fact. On August 20, 1942 Rep. John M. Coffee read the 
agreement into the Congressional Record, demanding that action be taken against 
the Du Ponts and officials at GM, but nothing was done. During the 1930s the Du 
Pont family controlled GM through stock ownership." 

Before and during World War II, there was considerable Nazi support in the 
U.S., which is rarely discussed today. Groups like the Christian Front and Silver 
Shirts had hundreds of thousands of followers including people in the military, 
police, and National Guard. They planned to provoke a communist uprising and 
use that excuse to establish a fascist state. There was a serious concern about a 
coup d'etat; these groups were extremely violent with many blacks and Jews 
attacked in various cities. Hundreds disappeared. Leaders like William Bishop were 
arrested and brought to trial. While some were convicted, others were freed. The 
FBI and certain members of the cabinet actively worked to negate this influence, 
but the large corporations and certain members of Congress supported these fac- 
tions, so prosecutors like Bill Maloney and O. John Rogge were ultimately fired 
or forced to resign from the government. These fascists were protected by powerful 
people in the government. By the late 1930s, seven senators and 13 representatives 
were using their free mail privileges to distribute Nazi literature. Some of this 
activity continued throughout the war. 

A good example of the fascist influence during the war was the case of Martin 
Monti. While stationed in the U.S. Army in Italy, he stole a plane and flew to 
enemy territory. Brought to Berlin he broadcast via radio Nazi propaganda to 
American troops. As a reward he was made a lieutenant in the SS. After the war, 
for this treason, he was given a 15 year suspended sentence and allowed to reenlist. 
Good Nazis were needed to fight communism. 

Considering the association of Wall Street and the newer American fascist 
groups with the European fascists, there was probably a close alignment with 
these two American groups which represented a fourth attempt by the corporate 
elite to establish a fascist state in America. However, this has not yet been clari- 
fied by historians. One prominent American Nazi, Lawrence Dennis, formerly of 
the State Department, worked for E.A. Pierce and Co., a Wall Street firm. Many 
of these groups supported retired General Moseley, past aide to General 
MacArthur, to be their leader. In a 1939 speech before the New York Board of 
Trade, Moseley praised Hitler and Mussolini and attacked the Jews, Roosevelt, and 
communism." Arthur L. Derounian, under the pseudonym John Roy Carlson, 
spent five years studying American fascists and, in Under Cover, reported that one 
leader, Merwin K. Hart, had considerable support from many business leaders in- 
cluding Lamont Du Pont and officials at GM, Remington-Rand and Otis Elevator 
Company." 

In 1940 opinion polls showed that over 80 percent of the people did not want 
to get into a European war, and the America First Committee (AFC) had 850,000 
members and millions of sympathizers. Although it refused to work with Nazi 



Early Signs of Treason 



organizations and had many Jewish members, it was attacked as being pro-fascist 
and anti-Semitic in a manner similar to today's attack on the militias. Isolationism 
was equated with racism. This was typical government and media propaganda. 
Except for infiltration by fascists and anti-Semites in a few places, this populist 
movement simply believed in peace. It supported the Bill of Rights and attacked 
excessive federal government power and secrecy. Members included future presi- 
dents John F. Kennedy and Gerald Ford. John Flynn, a leader of the AFC, became 
a strict constitutionalist when he realized that Roosevelt, with the New Deal, was 
paving the way for a future dictator. Flynn became a major critic of the New Deal 
partly because Roosevelt brought so many Wall Streeters into the government." 
He investigated how Roosevelt, Wall Street, and the British conspired to use film, 
radio, and the press to promote war and to slander groups like the AFC for want- 
ing peace. Flynn discovered that Carlson, who wrote Under Cover, also wrote for 
the communists and his attack on the AFC was partly Wall Street propaganda to 
weaken legitimate American patriotism." 

Trading With the Enemy, by Charles Higham, is a remarkable book that 
presents in great detail the financial transactions of American corporations with the 
Nazis before and during World War II. Much of this information was obtained 
through the Freedom of Information Act in the late 1970s, before that act was 
weakened. Industrialists especially from American, England, and German met in 
1920s and 1930s to divide up the world through secret agreements. Published in 
1983, Barnes & Noble reprinted it in 1995. 

Planning another war, various bankers established the Bank for International 
Settlements (BIS) in 1930 in Switzerland, so bills between countries could be 
more easily paid during a war. Owned by the world's central banks and Morgan 
Bank, it was also used to send millions of dollars to Germany to build its war 
machine. Throughout World War II, BIS was used to pay bills between the U.S. 
and Germany, and BIS remained a correspondent bank for the Federal Reserve Bank 
in Washington. World War II was planned in the board rooms of Berlin, New 
York, and London. Various corporate/banker groups like the CFR blocked the 
U.S. and England from interfering with Hitler's aggressive moves before the war. 
A world war meant great profits and offered another chance to establish a second 
League of Nations and world government. 

The Chase Bank, Standard Oil of N.J. , Morgan Bank group, ITT, RCA, Ford, 
GM, and many other American companies provided the Nazis with crucial war 
supplies during World War II, while thousands of Americans died fighting the 
Axis powers. These companies and people were called the Fraternity. Nazi cor- 
porate assets in the U.S. were also protected during the war. The U.S. war effort 
never benefited from this trade, and it was sometimes hindered because certain 
supplies America needed were instead diverted to the Nazis. Some U.S. corpora- 
tions distributed pro-Nazi literature in the U.S. before and during World War II 
because they wanted the Nazis to win the war. Then it would have been easier to 
establish a similar fascist state in the U.S. President Roosevelt supported this 
trade by signing E.O. 8389 on December 13, 1941 which legalized trading with 
the enemy. Just as with the collapse of the Soviet empire, when the power of the 
secret government is broken, many of our heroes will be exposed and forgotten. 
"The auto industry, the oil industry, the aluminum industry, the steel industry and 
many great corporations sabotaged America before and after Pearl harbor...." 



90 Treason The New World Order 



CHAPTER X— GENERAL LICENSES 



GENERAL LICENSE UNDER SECTION 
3 (a) OF THE TRADING WITH THE 
ENEMY ACT 

By virtue of and pursuant to the au- 
thority vested in me by sections 3 and 5 
of the Trading with the enemy Act, as 
amended, and by virtue of all other au- 
thority vested in me, I, FRANKLIN D. 
ROOSEVELT, PRESIDENT of the 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, do pre- 
scribe the following: 

A general license is hereby granted li- 
censing any transaction or act prohibited 
by section 3 (a) of the Trading with the 
enemy Act, as amended, provided, how- 



ever, that such transaction or act is au- 
thorized by the Secretary of the Treasury 
by means of regulations, rulings, instruc- 
tions, licenses or otherwise, pursuant to 
Executive Order No. 8389, as amended. 

FRANKLIN D ROOSEVELT 
THE WHITE HOUSE 

December 13, 1941. 

H. MORGENTHAU, Jr. 

Secretary of the Treasury 

FRANCIS BIDDLE 

Attorney General of the 
United States 



Various congressional investigations and the Assistant Attorney General of 
the U.S., Thurman Arnold, "have produced incontrovertible evidence that some of 
our biggest monopolies entered into secret agreements with the Nazi cartels and 
divided the world among them.'"' The U.S. auto and aviation industries constantly 
delayed converting to tank, plane, and military vehicle production, so there was 
talk of their production facilities being taken over by the government. 40 I.F. Stone 
discussed this treason in Business As Usual. Arnold warned that war production 
was being crippled by the machinations of certain large corporations. He 
complained about their international agreements. On June 26, 1941 Secretary of 
Interior Ickes said "If America loses the war it can thank the Aluminum 
Corporation of America." Alcoa had a cartel agreement with I.G. Farben, so 
Germany had sufficient aluminum for war production while the U.S. lacked 
enough aluminum before and during the war. 41 The Milwaukee Journal suggested 
the death penalty for corporate leaders who sabotaged the war effort. However, 
most large newspapers took ads from these corporations and defended their actions. 

In 1939 with the U.S. very short of rubber, Standard Oil of N.J. , the largest 
oil company in the world, in the Jasco accord agreed that I.G. Farben would 
control the production of synthetic oil, with Standard Oil producing it in the U.S. 
only if and when I.G. Farben allowed this. This deal blocked American develop- 
ment of synthetic rubber. Senator Truman on March 26, 1942 called this treason. 



Early Signs of Treason 91 



Even with a war, this serious charge by a prominent senator was largely ignored 
by the press and only two important newspapers reported this charge. The Truman, 
Bone, and Kilgore Committees said Standard Oil had "seriously imperiled the war 
preparations of the U.S." 

Standard Oil of N.J. sent oil and oil parts to Germany through South 
America, Spain, and Switzerland throughout the war and at lower prices than the 
U.S. paid. It even refueled German U boats on the open seas. The Germans were 
constantly short of oil, so this aid probably prolonged the war by many months. 
Only Standard Oil, Du Pont, and GM had the rights to tetraethyl lead, a key 
additive used in gasoline." In 1992 the Village Voice reported that the Wall Street 
investment firm Brown Brothers Harriman arranged for the Nazis to get and be 
trained in using tetraethyl lead in 1938. A senior partner of this firm was Prescott 
Bush, father of George Bush. This supply was critical to conduct modern warfare. 
In 1939 the Germans were short of this fuel, so they purchased S20 million of it 
from Standard Oil to invade Poland. 

On March 26, 1942 Rep. Jerry Voohis entered a resolution in the House to 
investigate the BIS to learn why an American remained president of a bank which 
was aiding the Axis powers. During World War II, R. Buckminster Fuller served 
as head mechanical engineer of the U.S.A. Board of Economic Warfare. In this 
position he saw government transcripts of intercepted phone conversations, letters, 
and cables. "As a student of patents I asked for and received all the intercept 
information relating to strategic patents held by both our enemies and our own big 
corporations, and I found the same money was often operative on both sides in 
World War 11."" 

ITT provided telephones, air raid warning devices, radar equipment, and 30,000 
fuses per month for artillery shells to better kill allied troops. This rose to 50,000 
fuses a month by 1944. ITT also supplied ingredients for the rocket bombs that 
hit England. During the war two of the largest tank producers in Germany were 
Adam-Opel and Ford of Cologne. Both were wholly owned subsidiaries of GM and 
Ford. 4 * Ford trucks were built for the German army while the Chase Bank kept its 
branch open in Paris throughout the war, with the agreement of the New York 
office, to provide financial services to the Nazis. "On January 6, 1944, the U.S. 
Government had indicted the Du Ponts and Imperial Chemicals Industries of 
Britain for forming a cartel with I.G. Farben of Germany and Mitsui of 
Japan. ...The Du Ponts secretly helped in the armament of Germany, and especially 
aided Hitler," even betraying military secrets to Germany." During the war U.S. 
owned factories in Germany were often deliberately not bombed by the allies. 
Several sources claim that after the war the U.S. government paid firms like GM 
millions of dollars because some of their factories did sustain damage from allied 
bombings. 

Throughout the war, a Philadelphia company controlled by the Sweden-SKF 
company supplied the Nazis with large quantities of ball bearings via South 
America, although the U.S. was short of these items. Without ball bearings, 
planes and trucks could not operate properly. Some of the employees and execu- 
tives at the Philadelphia plant protested what was occurring but the Fraternity was 
too powerful for the U.S. government to do anything. One partner running this 
firm was William Batt of the U.S. War Production Board, while another partner, 
Hugo von Rosen, was cousin to Hermann Goring, head of the Nazi air force. 



92 Treason The New World Order 



During the war many American insurance companies reinsured their business 
through Swiss insurance companies which further insured the polices through 
German companies. Because of this these foreign insurance companies knew in 
advance the sailing date, location, and cargo contents of U.S. ships going to Eu- 
rope. This is why so many ships were sunk. Even after the Justice Department 
told U.S. insurance companies to stop forwarding such information, the practice 
continued for at least one and a half years into the war. The Germans also obtained 
the blueprints of many insured U.S. installations, like the White House, which 
made it easy to identify and blow up key buildings. In 1945 so much of this in- 
formation was found in the files of German intelligence that they had a good 
understanding of U.S. military production." 

While these corporations did this trade for profit, they also believed in 
fascism. Like Hitler they considered democracy and communism inherently sub- 
versive. Many business leaders were also extremely anti-Semitic. Henry Ford 
wrote The International Jew in 1927 and attacked the Jews in various newspapers 
such as the New York World. Many in Germany, including Hitler, were very 
influenced by this book, and Ford was one of the few people praised in Mein 
Kampf. Ford's book also helped make respectable the bizarre ideas of the Nazis. 
The New York Times on December 20, 1922 reported that Ford was funding 
Hitler, then an obscure fanatic. 

Based on government documents and interviews with many retired U.S. and 
British intelligence agents and diplomats, the book The Secret War Against the 
Jews, described much corporate treason before, during, and after World War II. The 
authors confirmed much information provided in Trading With the Enemy while 
adding many new insights. Allen Dulles was called one of the worst traitors this 
Republic has ever had. The British established a wiretap network in Manhattan to 
learn who was aiding the Nazis. Then they brought in a hit squad that secretly 
killed American businessmen, bankers, lawyers, and dockworkers involved in this 
trade. Reportedly this was done with the agreement of Roosevelt. The British 
operation was led by William Stevenson, who later wrote A Man Called Intrepid, 
in which he described some of these activities. 47 In 1989 the Washington Post 
published an article on British operations in America during the war. A reporter 
was allowed a brief look at a 423-page document the British wrote in 1945 
describing these activities." 

Throughout World War II American diplomats in Switzerland included promi- 
nent Wall Streeters like Allen Dulles. Head of U.S. intelligence in Switzerland 
during the war, Dulles for years had worked for German firms and he conducted 
secret meetings with the Nazis that Roosevelt was not aware of." He wanted an 
allied/Nazi alliance against the Soviets, and he reportedly gave the Nazis the allied 
war plans for Europe. When Dulles went to Switzerland, a law partner, De Lano 
Andrews, replaced him to continue representing various German firms in New 
York. Lada Mocarski, director of the New York branch of Schroeder Bank, became 
U.S. Vice Counsel in Zurich. Leland Harrison, U.S. minister in Berne, Switzer- 
land, helped Standard Oil ship the Nazis oil. These diplomats protected American 
business interests in Germany, and if German firms needed supplies like oil or 
munitions they provided assistance. 

Allen Dulles was legal advisor to the Anglo-German Schroeder Bank. This 
was the German bank for I.G. Farben, and Quigley, in Tragedy and Hope, said this 
bank helped bring Hitler to power. The Dulles brothers attended the meeting, 



Early Signs of Treason 93 



which was sponsored by the Schroeder Bank, of leading industrialists in Berlin on 
January 4, 1933, in which the commitment was made to support Hitler. A 
Cologne branch of this bank, the Stein Bank, was the main financier to Himmler 
and the SS leadership. When Hitler took control in 1933, Kurt von Schroeder 
became the German representative to BIS. Schroeder was arrested after the war, but 
he was not prosecuted. 

John Foster Dulles, later Secretary of State, along with his brother Allen 
Dulles, was a partner at Sullivan and Cromwell, the New York law firm that 
handled loans to Germany during the 1920s and 1930s, and they handled all I.G. 
Farben legal work in the U.S. In 1936 a Schroeder investment group merged with 
a Rockefeller group to form the Schroeder Rockefeller Company. The alliances of 
these corporate elitists would take hundreds of pages to describe."' 

Only one American went to jail for this treasonous trade with the enemy dur- 
ing World War II. Throughout the war, senior government officials like Treasury 
Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr. tried to stop this treason, while others such as 
Dean Acheson, a former Standard Oil lawyer and later Secretary of State, blocked 
efforts to stop this trade. Several times there were threats to stop oil supplies to 
the allies if pressure against this corporate treason didn't end. For protecting Nazi 
industrialists, one British officer was court martialed and jailed for two years, 
while several American officials were dismissed. It is understandable why many 
now promoting the new world order have such contempt for the American people. 
Their treason was promoted and protected by the federal government, and the guilty 
were rarely punished. Some senior American officials who tried to stop this 
treason were after the war called communists and forced to retire. 

During World War II James Martin headed the Economic Warfare Section of 
the Justice Department. This group studied German international business agree- 
ments. After the war Martin spent several years in Germany leading efforts to end 
Nazi influence and break up their cartels. In 1950 he wrote All Honorable Men. In 
great detail this book depicts the secret alliances between German, U.S., and 
British companies through secret treaties, foreign subsidiaries, patent restrictions, 
and interlocking directorates. Directors of Standard Oil, GE, and ITT, through 
German subsidiaries and personal contacts, contributed money to Himmler's Circle 
of Friends until 1944." For these contributions the companies were protected by 
the SS, and they got first pick of slave labor for their factories. If there were any 
problems, certain U.S. government officials made sure the money flow continued. 
After the war U.S. Army Colonel Bogdan tried to hide this money transfer from 
investigators. 

Martin explained how, after the war, attempts to end Nazi influence, break up 
the large German cartels, and seize Nazi assets in various countries were deliber- 
ately blocked, supposedly to assist German recovery. He called the group that 
successfully went against official U.S. government policy towards Germany the 
international brotherhood or the international fraternity. Documents seized after the 
war showed how companies like Ford and Chase Bank conducted business as usual 
with their European subsidiaries during the war. The U.S. Treasury wanted to 
investigate numerous banks including Chase, Morgan, National City, Bankers 
Trust, and American Express but this was blocked. 

Key American representatives in Germany after the war came from large cor- 
porations like Rufus Wysor from Republic Steel Corporation, Frederick Devereux 
from AT&T, and Louis Douglas from GM. The First Director of the U.S. Eco- 



94 Treason The New World Order 



nomics Division in Germany, Colonel Graeme Howard from GM, wrote a book in 
1940 America and a New World Order. The next head, General William Craper was 
Secretary-Treasurer of Dillion, Read & Co. an investment banking firm that 
played a major role in lending money to Germany after World War I. These people 
and many aides they brought to Germany deliberately blocked Washington's anti- 
Nazi policies after World War II. Martin said: "In the end we were caught between 
businessmen representing private interests and others of the same persuasion hold- 
ing official positions, where they had power to change the orders under which we 
operated." Many of these people, like General Clay, were members of the CFR." 

In 1948 after many complaints about U.S. policy not being carried out in 
Germany, Congress held an investigation. The Ferguson Committee report was 
released April 15, 1949, but the Army still refused to carry out U.S. policies. 
Alexander Sacks an American official trying to carry out these policies said: "The 
policies of the Roosevelt and Truman Administrations have been flagrantly 
disregarded by the very individuals who were charged with the highest responsi- 
bility for carrying them out." For his honesty he was promptly fired, although he 
was reinstated." U.S. corporations were afraid that if the Nazis were prosecuted, 
their own involvement would be revealed. 

Martin warned about the dangerous power of the large corporations that gov- 
ernments needed to control. He complained that our government had not stood up 
to this great economic power partly because of a belief that corporations do not 
need to be governed. "We cannot allow the lack of social responsibility character- 
istic of the international behavior of private corporations during the last quarter- 
century to become a pattern for government." He understood that economic power 
must be brought under some kind of responsible control. "Since power is a public 
trust, the first job of a government is to see that power is used in the public 
interest and not against it. This is where a government must be different from a 
corporation. ...National governments in all parts of the world have granted power 
over segments of their national economics to various corporations...." to "build a 
private 'world government.' This new order, stretching far beyond the boundaries 
of any one nation, has operated under no law except the private law of the 
agreements themselves. ...It is time to view the results of this abdication by 
constitutional governments in favor of private governments." Martin warned that 
just as the large corporations brought Hitler to power, unless something was done 
to limit corporate power, something similar could happen in the U.S." 

Certain influential Nazis realized they would lose the war so they gradually 
moved large sums of money, people, and corporate structures overseas, with the 
help of people like the Dulles brothers. Called "The Odessa" a 1945 U.S. Treasury 
Department report said the Nazis had established at least 750 businesses overseas 
capable of bringing in $30 million a year to support Nazi operations. Nazis helped 
create South Africa's racist laws and South American death squads, they trained the 
Arabs to fight Israel, and the many Nazis allowed into the U.S. subverted our 
institutions and culture." 

U.S. investigators after the war deliberately changed, ignored, or concealed 
evidence of war crimes against Nazi scientists and officials. Our laws were violated 
and many Nazi scientists moved to the U.S. under Project Paperclip." For years 
the immigration of Nazi war criminals into the U.S. was kept out of the press, or 
there was biased reporting. U.S. intelligence agents changed the records of many 
Nazi war criminals, so that by 1955 about 800 Nazi scientists were working in the 



Early Signs of Treason 95 



U.S. As described in some National Security Council directives in the late 1940s 
and 1950s, this was official U.S. policy. As civilian High Commissioner in 
Germany in 1949, John J McCloy, a leader of the CFR, helped direct Project 
Paperclip. 

For years after the war, a Nazi General Gehlen was the main source for U.S. 
intelligence regarding the communist nations. Later it became clear that he delib- 
erately provided false information or exaggerated the capabilities of the Soviet 
Union and its allies, which caused the West great harm. General Karl Wolff, an SS 
officer and aide to General Gehlen, said: "We'll get our Reich back again. The 
others will begin to fight among themselves eventually and then we'll be in the 
middle and can play one off against the other." Gehlen deliberately brought his 
intelligence organization to the U.S. so he could secretly help the Odessa oper- 
ations and create East West tensions." 

U.S. officials and the corporate controllers loved Gehlen's lies because his 
information justified the cold war and the spending of billions of dollars for the 
national security state. And certain fascists in the U.S. quietly supported preserv- 
ing Nazi influence. These Nazi war criminals were also used by our government to 
promote ideals of freedom and democracy in the communist nations. Often Nazi- 
like propaganda was filtered into the messages received by the communist 
nations." 

After 1950 the Displaced Persons Commission openly allowed fascists into 
the U.S. The CIA-inspired Crusade for Freedom used various fascist groups to 
support the cold war in the U.S. These individuals joined right wing groups and an 
Eastern European emigre fascist network linked to former Nazi collaborators 
entered the Republican party through its ethnic programs such as the Heritage 
Groups Council." In 1971 the Washington Post did an article on the fascist back- 
ground of some elements of the Republican party."' In September, 1988 the racist 
and anti-Semitic leanings of certain Republican ethnic leaders was revealed and 
eight officials were forced to resign from the Bush campaign. 

Many of the banks and corporations conducting these treasonous activities are 
the same groups today plotting to establish a one world government. While there 
may today be no individuals in these businesses who committed treason before and 
during World War II, few would argue that international corporations today are 
much less loyal to America than was true 50 years ago. Millions of jobs have 
been lost as corporations shift manufacturing jobs overseas for more profits. The 
devastating impact this has on the U.S. is not relevant to these corporations. 
While this certainly does not mean every international corporation would commit 
treason, it does suggest that the treason conducted in World War II would not be 
foreign to many present day conglomerates. 

Setting up antagonistic forces to create a war is a normal business practice 
that doesn't get discussed in history books. Bankers are almost always the one 
group guaranteed to profit from a war, and when they prolong a war, profits are 
higher. On December 9, 1950 the Chicago Tribune said: "The members of the 
council (CFR). ..have used the prestige that their wealth, their social position, and 
their education have given them to lead their country toward bankruptcy and mili- 
tary debacle. They should look at their hands. There is blood on them — the dried 
blood of the last war and the fresh blood of the present one (Korean War)." To this 
we can add the Vietnam and Gulf Wars. 



96 Treason The New World Order 



Frederick C. Howe acknowledged in, Confessions of a Monopolist in 1906, 
that a monopoly was essential to acquire great wealth and the best way to establish 
this was through politics, making society work for the large corporations under 
the guise of public interest. The welfare state, fascism, communism, and social- 
ism are really similar means used by the corporate elite to gather wealth and con- 
trol the people. Those who reject the view that there is a secret government in 
control and that these groups intend to remove the Constitution and establish a 
police state should carefully reflect on our history early this century. The corporate 
elite attempted to establish a dictatorship then so it should not surprise the objec- 
tive observer that these forces are now attempting to do the same thing. As 
politicians demonstrate every day, the rule of law has been replaced by the rule of 
money in America. 



97 



Chapter VIII 
Rise of the Corporate State 



"The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political 
importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the 
growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against 
democracy." 

Alex Carey 1 

"To erect and concentrate and perpetuate a large moneyed interest. ..must in the 
course of human events produce one or other of two evils, the prostration of 
agriculture at the feet of commerce, or a change in the present form of federal 
government, fatal to the existence of American liberty." 

Patrick Henry 



While it has been suppressed from our history, in Liggett v. Lee (1933) 
Supreme Court Justice Brandeis described how, in the early years of our Republic, 
states either wouldn't allow or sharply restricted the formation of corporations 
because they limited freedom and opportunity for the people. The people kept the 
power to charter corporations strictly in the hands of the legislature. Corporations 
were chartered to serve the public good, corporate privileges were often conferred 
for a fixed terms of years, and strict limits were placed on the allowed indebt- 
edness. Previously corporations could only be established for specific activities; 
permission to incorporate for any lawful purpose was not common until 1875. At 
times the corporate privilege was revoked, when the state felt this was best for the 
community. For years there were strict limits on the amount of authorized capital 
that could be used when a business incorporated. Until 1918 mining companies 
could incorporate in Maryland with only up to S3 million. 

Many forget that corporations have no inherent right to exist. This is a power 
granted by the state. Gradually limits on corporate charters were removed through 
corporate influence, money, and lawyers, as judges issued rulings to support 
corporations. States competed with each other to raise money by chartering corpo- 
rations with few requirements. That many corporations today are registered in 
Delaware is a vestige of that competition. The movement of large corporations 
into thousands of small towns gradually shifted economic and political power from 
Main Street to Wall Street, which created a disparity of income and concentrated 
wealth. Brandeis said big business limited self-government by eroding the civic 
and moral capacities of the people and by controlling democratic institutions. 5 

Until the late 19th century the law primarily focused on the rights of 
individuals. After the Civil War the role and rights of corporations were gradually 
established. The Supreme Court, in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific 
Railroad (1886), said corporations would now be considered "persons" for purposes 



Treason The New World Order 



of the Fourteenth Amendment. A corporation became a legal fiction granted legit- 
imacy by judicial and legislative degree. The revolutionary trends of the 18th 
century that began in America and France and promoted individual liberty were 
weakened with the introduction of corporate rights. 

Increased concentration of wealth and power in the hands of fewer people 
developed after the Civil War. Before the 1880s society was mostly agrarian and 
most businesses were directly managed by the owners. Most people were self- 
employed; they owned their own land, produced their own food, and there was little 
manufacturing. Gradually people had to work for others to earn money. There 
developed an economically powerful elite, and most people worked for others as 
laborers. Around the turn of the century, 90 percent of the population was still 
self-employed. By 1992 only four percent of the people were self-employed. We 
are no longer a nation of shopkeepers, farmers, and independent craftsman. This 
change helped make money foremost in people's lives. The new corporate order 
meant less democracy and increased concentration of economic power, with busi- 
ness controlling all means of production. The old mercantile aristocracy became 
the new corporate elite. With mechanization fewer workers were needed on farms, 
so people moved to the cities. The loss of small farmers to the cities meant the 
loss of many independent thinkers, which weakened the democratic fabric of our 
Republic. Large businesses now dominate agriculture. Aided by the railroad the 
frontier disappeared and a truly national economy developed. 

The rise of and preoccupation with mass-market consumerism and indulgence 
gradually developed after the Civil War, especially in the 1890s. "In the decades 
following the Civil War, American capitalism began to produce a distinct culture, 
unconnected to traditional family or community values, to religion in any 
conventional sense, or to political democracy. It was a secular business and market 
-oriented culture, with the exchange and circulation of money and goods at the 
foundation of its aesthetic life. ..The cardinal features of this culture were acquis- 
ition and consumption as the means of achieving happiness; the cult of the new; 
the democratization of desire; and money value as the predominant measure of all 
value in society.'" The psychoanalyst Erich Fromm said: "In contrast to the 
nineteenth century, in which saving was a virtue, the twentieth century has made 
consumption into the main virtue." The age of mass consumption also brought 
with it the dawn of the advertising industry, and people's habits were changed to 
consume more. And people were socialized to accept the harsh conditions of mass 
production in factories which many workers rebelled against. 4 

God was replaced by gain. Caring relationships were too often replaced with a 
desire to succeed in business. Instead of having a close relationship with one's 
family, a career became more important. Corporate values replaced family values. 
One result, of course, is the much higher divorce rate today. One's standard of liv- 
ing became the primary focus and objective in life. Our ideal of freedom became 
the ability to purchase and consume. We were no longer proud citizens of a 
Republic; we became consumers in a market economy. World War I "had not been 
fought for democracy or for nationalism but for industrialism" to ensure that "the 
power of production would never again be endangered....'" 

"From the 1890s on, American corporate business, in league with key instit- 
utions, began the transformation of American society into a society preoccupied 
with consumption, with comfort and bodily well-being, with luxury, spending, 
and acquisition... .American consumer capitalism produced a culture almost vio- 



Rise of the Corporate State 99 



lently hostile to the past and to tradition, a future-oriented culture of desire that 
confused the good life with goods. It was a culture that first appeared as an 
alternative culture. ..and then unfolded to become the reigning culture of the U.S.'" 
Aided by the industrial mobilization of World War I, corporations attained an 
increasingly dominant role in America. 

This new culture was promoted by commercial groups allied with other elites 
attempting to accumulate ever greater amounts of capital. Other conceptions of the 
good life were pushed aside. Business leaders cooperated with educators, politi- 
cians, social-reformers, entertainers, artists, and religious leaders to create a new 
economy and culture. American public life was diminished as democratic traditions 
and institutions were pushed aside to make way for the new culture. New institu- 
tions like the Harvard Business School and the Metropolitan Museum of Art were 
recruited to shape the new America. At the turn of the century during the age of 
the muckrakers, magazines attacked monopolies and private economic power. By 
the 1920s magazines had gone from exposing corporate corruption to praising 
business success and the consumer society. The corporate way become the Ameri- 
can way partly because big business gained control of the media. Socialism never 
succeeded in America because the goals of socialism such as a classless society and 
liberty for all already occurred in America, or at least this is what the media told 
us. 

Inspired by growing incomes and a rising standard of living, many capitalists 
and progressive reformers promoted a new form of democracy at once more in- 
clusive and more confining than before. Self-pleasure and self-fulfillment over 
community or civic well-being became the norm. Comfort and prosperity became 
the cornerstone of life in America. The influential economist, John Bates Clark, 
said that despite the growing inequality of life in America, democracy could be 
ensured through the free market and the ever growing supply of goods and services. 

This new thinking was discussed in The New Democracy by Walter Weyl in 
1912. Weyl said: "Democracy means material goods and the moral goods based 
thereon. ...To socialize our consumption we must therefore depend upon the direct 
or indirect action of the state....'" A new and improved morality, a new ethics of 
pleasure would be derived from a new economic order in conjunction with political 
democracy. Weyl and other prominent thinkers like Simon Patton, an economist 
and professor at the Wharton School of Economics, felt that modern corporations 
were moral institutions, and there was nothing wrong with the new emphasis on 
money and consumption. 

A powerful populist movement arose with many farmers, independent mer- 
chants, religious leaders, social-reformers, socialists, intellectuals, economists, and 
unionists attacking this new way of life. Previously, democracy was thought to be 
partly based on ownership of property and control of one's production. In 1879 the 
economist Henry Carter Adams warned: "Either you must establish a more eq- 
uitable division of properly and produce or the fatal end of democracy will be 
despotism and decadence." Part of the broad appeal of the prairie populist, Rep. 
William Jennings Bryan of Nebraska in the 1890s, was a rejection of the new 
value system offered by the corporate culture and a call to restore Jeffersonian 
grass-roots democracy. Large corporations were often hated and considered undem- 
ocratic. The "patriotic role" that corporations supposedly played during World War 
I changed this attitude. According to the press, the corporations helped preserve 



100 Treason The New World Order 



democracy. Intense antibusiness sentiment eased during the war because business 
produced the goods needed to win the war. 

Many religious people at the turn of the century criticized the new values of 
the corporate culture. Today many religious groups have closely aligned them- 
selves with the corporate culture. Most people don't realize that millions of 
Americans have been captivated and transformed by a corporate culture that was 
once considered quite foreign and alien to traditional American political, economic, 
and spiritual values. 

Citizen involvement that had spawned the progressive movement changed to 
citizen apathy. One commentator in the 1920s said "The private life became the all 
in all." The disgust that many now feel towards public office and politicians was 
quite common in the 1920s." Apathy and cynicism ruled the day. The public was 
too busy trying to get rich to notice or care what the politicians were doing. 

In 1924 Samuel Strauss, a political scientist and journalist, wrote an article 
about the changes in America that is even more relevant today. "Something new 
has come to confront American democracy. The fathers of the Nation did not fore- 
see it. ...That which has stolen across the path of American democracy and is 
already altering Americanism was not in their calculations" and would have been 
considered abnormal to them.' The Founders could not have foreseen, nor would 
they have necessarily agreed with the importance of manufacturing and money in 
America. 

Consumptionism produced remarkable changes in America. People stopped 
attacking the very wealthy as luxury, comfort, and security became the essential 
elements of the good life. Strauss said "The new kind of man sees, not human 
beings, but things at the centre of life." The new man "had no interest in keeping 
us free. .except as we must be free to consume goods." 10 Television insures that 
we continue to equate consumerism with democracy. President Woodrow Wilson 
said: "The truth is we are all caught in a great economic system, which is heart- 
less." 

It was felt all people had an equal right to consumer goods. The revolution in 
mass production and growth of consumer capitalism filled stores with goods to 
satisfy needs not yet understood to even exist. The present focus in society is how 
to develop enough interest in goods that are produced, i.e., how to produce con- 
sumers. Good government has come to mean that the government provides the 
people with the means to buy more goods. The progressive Senator Robert 
LaFollette, Sr. said: "The welfare of all the people as consumers should be the 
supreme consideration of government." 

We have gone from being a nation of citizens, with rights and responsibili- 
ties, to being consumers addicted to more and more goods that the corporations 
produce for us to buy even when there is no need. Consumerism had replaced 
citizenship. G.K. Chesterton, an English author, made many trips to the U.S. in 
the 1920s and 30s. He said: "Americans are good neighbors rather than good 
citizens. That pure and positive public spirit has faded from their life more than 
from that of any people in the world. What is the matter with America is that 
every American has been tacitly or loudly taught that his job is not only more 
vital than his vote, but more vital than that virtue of public spirit which the vote 
represents.'" 1 

Critical of anti-democratic business corporations, Chesterton said: "Industrial 
capitalism and ideal democracy are everywhere in controversy; but perhaps only (in 



Rise of the Corporate State 101 



America) are they in conflict." Only in America was "industrial progress. ..the 
most undemocratic. ..The reality of modern capitalism is menacing the 
(democratic) ideal with terrors and even splendors that might well stagger the 
wavering and impressionable modern spirit. Upon the issue of that struggle 
depends the question of whether this great civilization continues to exist...." When 
defining our Republic, Chesterton compared the collapse into capitalism to the 
collapse into barbarism and the fall of the Republic. He said capitalism is like 
feudalism, with people employed and guarded by large corporations much like the 
feudal lords cared for and controlled the serfs." 

The power of the federal government expanded enormously during and after the 
Civil War, as a vast bureaucracy developed and the government intervened more in 
political, social, and economic matters. The traditional government role of regu- 
lating business gradually included serving business. In the 1890s government 
intervened to absorb commercial banks' losses, and after 1910 the U.S. Commerce 
Department expanded its activities. Business gradually depended on government 
guarantees of bank deposits and farm loans. These trends prepared the way for the 
New Deal. Led by the press and Washington, people allowed the federal govern- 
ment in league with business to play a more prominent role in their lives. The 
New Deal economic reforms represented the political application of economic and 
social trends that had been taking place for some years. 

There was a nationalization of the political system during the New Deal as 
political power shifted from local and state government to the federal government. 
In the federal government the executive branch and bureaucracy were strengthened 
and freed of party control, while the legislature was weakened as was the people's 
sense that they were actually represented by government. Corporations and the two 
political parties developed together, each promoting the other, with individual 
citizens increasingly removed from the political process. 

There was also a shift in constitutional law along with a change in how we 
perceived the role of government. Instead of having a government of limited 
powers, with a federal government that could only act in certain areas per the 
Constitution, a new federal government was born with unlimited powers to tax 
and rule in whatever fashion it deemed appropriate. Experts henceforth decided how 
we were ruled, as the people learned to follow orders. Supposedly experts who 
were above partisan politics would make technical decisions. The controlled media 
made sure the people didn't understand what had happened. The corporate culture 
became so strong that in 1939 the House Un-American Activities Committee 
called Consumers Union, which produces Consumer Reports, un-American. 

President Roosevelt said the task of modern government was "to assist the 
development of an economic declaration of rights, an economic constitutional 
order." The traditional reliance on individual self-reliance was replaced by a new 
understanding of individualism, with government regulating the economy and 
guaranteeing people protection from the uncertainties of the marketplace. Thus 
was the welfare state born. Increasingly, our liberties were defined by the freedoms 
the state granted; they were no longer God given as described in the Declaration of 
Independence. 

Instead of a Constitution that protects our liberties as described in the Bill of 
Rights, economic rights became the primary focus. This is another historical basis 
for the weakening of our liberties. People have minimum wages and the welfare 
state but in the process we also have asset forfeiture laws, no knock warrants, and 



102 Treason The New World Order 



rule by executive degree. A person can often work at a decent wage but they may 
have all their assets seized. We are trading a false sense of economic security for 
the loss of our rights. 

President Reagan once said: "What I want to see above all is that this remains 
a country where someone can always get rich." The desire and wish for wealth has 
replaced the desire and wish for freedom and the preservation of our rights. A much 
better goal is that this remain a Republic where everyone always has the God- 
given rights and freedoms that the Founders fought so hard to establish. There is 
today in America a new tyranny, with a state religion called the market economy. 
The market has succeeded and we are unhappy, materialist, and increasingly no 
longer free. 

Instead of people relating to each other as individuals something outside our- 
selves, money, constantly intervenes. Previously money had value because it 
represented objects. Now money controls people because it has such a powerful 
influence over our lives. Objects are now valuable only in that they represent 
money. "W.H. Auden thought that the most striking difference between Americans 
and Europeans was to be found in their different attitudes toward money. No 
European associates wealth with personal merit or poverty with personal failure. 
But to the American what is important is not so much the possession of money 
but the power to earn it as a proof of one's manhood!" 11 We are valued for the 
money we control not for integrity of character. With the corrupting influence of 
money and monetarization of feeling we should not be surprised that cheating in 
school and rampant crime have become the norm. 

Politicians during elections ask if people are better off economically. "The 
question is only and always about money, never about the spirit of the laws or the 
cherished ideals that embody the history of the people. ...To the extent that the 
wish to be cared for replaces the will to act, the commercial definition of democ- 
racy prompts the politicians to conceive of and advertise the Republic as if it were 
a resort hotel. They promise the voters the rights and comforts owed to them by 
virtue of their status as America's guests. ...The government. ..preserves its 
measure of trust in the exact degree that it satisfies the whims of its patrons and 
meets the public expectation of convenience and style at a fair price."" When 
spiritual considerations are active in life one inevitably strives to assist others. 
When money becomes the all in all, it is survival of the fittest, and a society 
deteriorates. 

Increasingly corporate speech has gained First Amendment protection." 
Corporations are using the Bill of Rights to protect themselves from state and 
federal laws especially with the expansion of environmental, health, and safety 
regulations. In California a public utility company used the First Amendment to 
overturn state regulations that lowered utility rates. Business has long attempted to 
gain for corporations the same constitutional rights that a citizen has except for 
voting. However, the more corporations have rights like citizens, the less rights 
citizens have. Citizens do not have the funds that corporations have, and a corpor- 
ation can continue indefinitely and in many places. If you sue a corporation, long 
distance travel may be required. We are all second class citizens before the power, 
wealth, and influence of corporations. When corporations commit crimes, they 
wish to be considered as artificial legal entities that cannot be held legally liable 
for their offenses. When convicted of crimes they still have all their political 
rights, unlike an individual who may lose his right to vote and even his freedom. 



Rise of the Corporate State 103 



Corporations should lose their rights of citizenship, or the responsibilities of citi- 
zenship that apply to individuals should be vehemently applied to corporations. 

During the 20th century there has been a shift from direct financial control to 
management control of corporations, with the banking community increasingly 
exerting its influence quietly and in the background. Stockholders rarely have a 
decisive say in how large corporations are managed, despite what is sometimes 
claimed. And the large corporations are generally closely associated with each other 
through joint advisory groups and various social, political, and trade associations. 
Members of the CFR and TC usually come from the corporate elite. 

Large management-run corporations usually operate in an authoritarian, hier- 
archical, and bureaucratic manner. They are not conducive to democratic thinking. 
They act increasingly like governments, and increasingly the federal government 
acts like these large corporations. While there are established checks and balances 
against unbridled government tyranny, however weakened these limitations have 
become, there are few real checks on unlimited corporate tyranny. The Republic 
has gradually been replaced by the corporate totalitarian model, with most people 
taking orders and having few rights. The Bill of Rights rarely applies in the work 
place. "Today's rhetorical attacks on 'big government' for interfering with business 
have largely succeeded in obscuring the fact that it is big business, not big govern- 
ment, that primarily regulates the lives of ordinary Americans." 16 

Today corporate officials play an increasingly dominant role in government. 
Senior government leaders come from banker/corporate financed think tanks and 
foundations with an occasional representative from labor. Economic and political 
power is controlled by the corporate elite, supported by an out-of-control intel- 
ligence apparatus. U.S. government economic policy is dominated by the Federal 
Reserve Bank, a private corporation. Government supposedly provides a sound 
infrastructure, stable society, and educated workers while business provides modern 
technology, a growing economy, and assistance during emergencies such as in a 
war. This alliance of government and the corporate elite is especially relevant in 
international affairs, as NAFTA and GATT have demonstrated. Increasingly this 
alliance means the exclusion of all other groups. Labor unions and universities 
provide fewer and fewer leaders in the federal government. 

Russell Mokhiber, in Corporate Crime and Violence, presented 36 serious 
cases of corporate crime. In many of these cases numerous people were injured or 
killed. Fifty suggestions are offered to curb corporate crimes. In U.S. v. Dotter- 
weich and U.S. v. Park, the Supreme Court held that business executives can be 
held criminally liable for violating the Food and Drug Act. This liability should 
exist whenever a business violates the law, and there should be stricter laws 
preventing the destruction of documents when corporations are involved in litiga- 
tion. As in Australia and England, U.S. prosecutors should be allowed to entrap 
corporations. State and local prosecutors should become more aggressive against 
corporate crime because federal laws are so weak and poorly enforced. In 1990 
California passed the Corporate Criminal Liability Act which includes possible 
criminal prosecution of managers if they don't report health and safety problems 
within 15 days of discovering such problems." Corporate managers should take 
responsibility for their actions as the law requires of private citizens. Too often, 
corporate executives are above the law. 

A limit should be placed on consent decrees when corporations are sued by the 
government allowing corporations to not acknowledge violating the law. A court 



104 Treason The New World Order 



approved consent degree can leave no trace of liability or culpability. This often 
makes it easier for corporations to hide felonious conduct, and individuals have 
more difficulty obtaining relief in civil litigation. Convicted corporations should 
more often be required to repay their victims. There should be better protection for 
whistleblowers, heavy fines, and forced retirement of an executive from a business 
upon conviction of serious criminal activity. Lawyers can lose their license when 
convicted of a felony; the same standard should apply to business executives. 

Ralph Nader suggested, repeatedly offending corporations should be fined, lose 
government contracts, and lose the right to take part in public debate, such as 
appearing before Congress or lobbying bills. Currently, FBI reports ignore corpo- 
rate crimes, such as financial fraud and occupational homicide. According to the 
FBI, about 24,000 people are murdered each year, but 56,000 people die from 
work-related diseases and accidents. Repeat offenders should be targeted to create 
more corporate accountability. Such corporations should be forced to sell a unit 
that continues to violate the law, lose the right to hold certain licenses as in the 
media, or lose their charter to exist. However, prosecutors often won't prosecute 
corporations." 

The law today is used to force compliance to the values of the corporate elite. 
Corporations often dominate legislatures, preventing laws that would hold busi- 
nesses accountable or improve safety precautions. When new bills are presented 
intense lobbying by businesses weakens them. Politicians are afraid to antagonize 
businesses because of a need for campaign donations, and there is a cultural 
homogeneity among legislators, judges, and administrators with businessmen. Lax 
standards towards corporations also exist partly because of biased news coverage. 
Corporations now define what is right and wrong in our society because they 
control the media. The norm has become the morality of corporate manufactured 
news. 

People convicted of minor crimes like using marijuana often receive harsh 
sentences while corporate felons that kill people get no prison time. The public is 
less resentful towards corporate crimes then direct violent crimes. There are today 
two justice systems in America — one for individuals and another for corporations, 
lail for corporate executives would be a strong deterrent to criminal activities. Just 
as the group Mothers Against Drunk Driving awakened the public conscience to 
punish drunk driving, we need to take a much more serious look at corporate 
criminal activity especially when people are seriously injured and killed. 

A classic example of how the federal government bends to the will of 
business today is the regulation of the meat and poultry industries. Each year at 
least 6.5 million Americans, and possibly many more, get ill from eating chick- 
ens. At least 1,000 people die, with children and the elderly especially at risk. The 
figure is much higher when you add the illnesses from eating diseased meat. Yet 
government inspection of the meat and poultry industries has changed little in this 
century, despite the fact that there now exists more sophisticated methods to 
inspect food that a few businesses and some European countries now use. The 
problem is that American meat and poultry industries did not want tighter inspec- 
tion standards and they are powerfully connected politically. In the fall of 1994 
Agriculture Secretary Mike Espry was forced to resign because of "gifts" he had 
accepted from the poultry industry, and only in early 1995 did the Clinton regime 
finally agree to establish improved standards of meat and poultry inspection." 



Rise of the Corporate State 105 



On October 27, 1994 after three years of denial Prudential Securities finally 
admitted that it had broken the law by selling limited partnerships in the 1980s. 
Over 120,000 people suffered losses in this criminal operation. Prudential Securi- 
ties paid a $330 million fine to conclude criminal charges, and last year it paid 
$371 million in fines to federal and state regulators to settle civil charges. 
Although many people suffered and the fines were quite high, no one involved in 
this scam went to prison. Corporations can do just about anything, yet they are 
above the law when it comes to serving time in jail." 

Businesses complain about federal legislation, but they often hide behind the 
federal government to block state laws they dislike. Business groups want to keep 
decision making focused at the federal level, where they have a better opportunity 
to control the outcome. While corporations now control both national political 
parties, some state governments have become more responsive to the people. 
From Baltimoreans United in Leadership Development to Industrial Areas 
Foundation in Texas, many community groups have formed. 

The Republican party is trying to federalize laws dealing with negligence and 
product liability. Again businesses will be able to hide behind the federal govern- 
ment. This needed reform should be done by the states. Federal laws now prevent 
state and local authorities from taking legal action against deceptive advertising by 
the airline industry. Only the U.S. Department of Transportation can regulate this 
area. The result is that the airlines are among the worst abusers of false advertising 
in the nation, and the federal government will do almost nothing about this. The 
airlines hide behind the federal government, while the people are cheated. 

Typically industry agrees to weaker federal standards if that frees them from 
stricter state rules. In 1994 banks got new interstate banking laws that overrode 
state limits on bank branches. Automobile manufacturers have fought to have 
federal laws replace stricter state standards on issues like auto emissions. When 
Vermont passed a law requiring credit reporting firms to automatically provide free 
annual credit reports, banks and consumer lenders worked to get a weaker federal 
law that would preempt this state law. Under the Constitution, the laws of 
Congress take precedent over state law, but traditionally Congress usually acted 
when the states hadn't acted, not to supersede state law. In recent years, this has 
changed. By 1988, 350 federal preemption laws had passed with 225 of them 
passed in the last 30 years. Powerful corporate lobbying groups are negating the 
wishes of people expressed on the state and local levels. Large corporations also 
turn to the government to avoid the risks of the market, as in defense procurement 
or public utility regulation. 

There is growing anger at the federal government for protecting corporations 
with preemption laws. New York is trying to enforce its strict lemon car laws 
without federal interference as car manufacturers would like. The National Confer- 
ence of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws has established a Uniform Com- 
mercial Code to have consistent laws for interstate commerce with less federal 
interference." If state laws offer consumers more protection, such laws should not 
be preempted. Federal preemption laws should be used only to protect individual 
rights. 

Billions of tax dollars go to farm subsidies, defense contractors, and mining 
companies each year. The Cato Institute found that almost every Fortune 500 
company gets some form of corporate welfare from the federal government. 
McDonalds has received $1 million and Tyson Foods $11 million for foreign 



106 Treason The New World Order 



advertising. The Progressive Policy Institute listed corporate tax breaks over five 
years including $5.9 billion for expanding intangible drilling costs for oil and gas, 
$5.7 billion tax credits for non-conventional fuels, $5.3 billion tax-exempt, 
private-purpose revenue bonds, and a $1.7 billion exemption for credit-union 
income. In the past 10 years up to 1994, $149 billion in farm subsidies was paid 
out. In Kansas the average farmer received $20,000 to $40,000 a year. In a recent 
period 50 percent of farmers' aid went to the wealthiest one percent of the farmers. 
Over $55 billion a year is spent on corporate welfare. Many of these businesses 
are highly profitable. The Democratic Leadership Council and the conservative 
Heritage Foundation came up with a long list of corporate welfare programs that 
could save hundreds of billions of dollars. People are increasingly contemptuous of 
the federal government, partly because it created a welfare state for corporations 
while giving people the bill." 

The classic example of how nothing has really changed is the passage of the 
Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act by Congress in 1996. Accord- 
ing to the press this would finally cut farm subsidies, but this is a lie. Under the 
just-ended formula, because farm prices are so high, government welfare to farms 
would have dropped sharply. Instead, with aid separated from crop prices, farm aid 
will increase. Read James Bovard's article in Barrons to appreciate how this bill 
protects the corporations." 

While reducing government welfare payments to people, the 10 point Repub- 
lican Contract With America did little to reduce corporate welfare. Despite many 
promises, Congress barely cut corporate welfare." Much corporate welfare origi- 
nated with the Democratic party, especially during the New Deal and the Great 
Society. When the Republicans made some proposals to cut corporate welfare, 
Clinton rejected such efforts. Perhaps one day the labor unions will wake up and 
realize that neither party represents their interests. Despite all the rhetoric, some 
corporate welfare has actually increased. The Agriculture Department is spending 
$110 million to advertise U.S. products overseas which is 30 percent over 1995. 
Clinton recommended increasing corporate aid by four percent." Important 
consumer protections are being gutted, such as consumer protections against 
fraudulent financial advisors, while New Deal bank protections and the 1991 Truth 
in Savings Act may soon end." 

The book, America: Who Really Pays the Taxes, shows how unfair our tax 
structure has become. Taxes on corporations have dropped sharply, while taxes on 
the middle class have risen precipitously. Before, the government taxed the rich. 
Now, it borrows money from them and pays interest. A General Accounting 
Office (GAO) study in 1993 said that 40 percent of the corporations doing 
business in the U.S. with assets of $250 million or more paid income taxes under 
$100,000 or paid no income tax at all. Another GOA study revealed that 34 per- 
cent of all corporations in the U.S. with assets over $100 million paid no income 
tax in 1989. During the 1950s, corporations in the U.S. paid 23 percent of all 
federal income taxes. By 1991 this had dropped to 9.2 percent, while the corporate 
share of state and local taxes stayed about what it was in 1965." In 1945 corpora- 
tions paid 50 percent of all federal tax revenue; now they pay about seven percent. 

The concentration of corporate power in the hands of fewer people has led not 
only to great economic inequality in income but also to increased control over the 
work place. It is now harder for workers to organize unions; the company can 
close and move overseas. The social safety net has been weakened, and it is much 



Rise of the Corporate State 107 



harder to attain a good job, food, and housing. There is also more employer 
surveillance and regulation of employees. Workers, like the serfs of old, are 
expected to be devoted to a company. Requiring employers to provide benefits like 
health insurance also increases the protector-dependent relationship. Workers are 
pressured to be more servile and to snitch on coworkers. Management at the Mazda 
plant in Flat Rock, Michigan said the workers belong to the company, they don't 
work for the firm. Workers were pressured to wear Mazda caps. 2 " 

In recent years companies have sued people who publicly opposed corporate 
projects. Litigation is an effective means to keep citizens from complaining." 
Peter Montague, an environmental reporter, alleged that a report on dioxin filed by 
a Monsanto Chemical Co. scientist was fraudulent in methodology and use of 
data. That scientist is now suing Montague. Once the suit was initiated, press 
coverage of this alleged corporate fraud ceased." 

Corporations are increasingly suing or threatening to sue the media. Philip 
Morris Co. sued ABC for a story on Day One about nicotine in cigarettes. In July, 
1994 the Health Care Reform Project, a group of organizations supporting 
Clinton's health-care reforms, held a news conference and stated that Pizza Hut paid 
for health insurance for its Japanese and German workers but not for its U.S. 
workers. Pizza Hut said this was libelous, so four television stations in Washing- 
ton, D.C. refused to air the story. In early 1994 a reporter for KMOL-TV in San 
Antonio refused to retract a story that a local business objected to. He was fired." 
As a result of these suits, California and New York passed laws blocking such 
corporate suits, and these corporate suits were ruled illegal by the Colorado 
Supreme Court." 

Another way in which millions of Americans are suffering from the power of 
Wall Street is in the derivatives boom. The bankruptcy of Orange County is 
hardly unique. Many governments and thousands of individuals lost huge sums of 
money to Wall Street, because the investment banks were allowed to present these 
complex investment instruments without explaining what was being sold. 

Corporations today finance a counterrevolution of ideas to replace political 
parties and vigilant citizens as the key source of ideas. Corporate-sponsored think 
tanks increasingly provide expert opinion for government officials and the national 
media. Dissenting voices rarely speak in the national media." Progressives, like 
Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal, have generally been banned from the national 
media for years, and now, except for a brief period after the Oklahoma bombing, 
members of the Patriot movement are also denied access to the national media. 

Workers are being pressured to support a company's political goals. In mid- 
August, 1994 IBM used E mail to 'advise' its employees about how to vote on 
health care reform. Citizens should be able to vote as they want without corporate 
pressure. Hundreds of corporate political organizations now organize the agenda 
and provide the financing that overwhelms the voice of the people. Business 
political-action committees replaced labor as the largest source of campaign money 
by the early 1980s. In 1974, labor unions accounted for half of all PAC money; 
by 1980, they accounted for under one fourth. Corporations have the money to 
pass laws and follow the regulatory agencies, while private citizens and labor 
groups cannot match this funding. Corporations have the financial resources 
needed in our new economic democracy. 

Despite the fact that the 1992 election represented the first time since 1981 
that the Democrats controlled both Congress and the White House, labor achieved 



108 Treason The New World Order 



none of its goals. Yet many pro-business goals were achieved such as NAFTA and 
the blocking of health reform. According to the National Library of Politics and 
Money, in the 1992 election, business groups donated $50.7 million of the $88 
million that went to Democratic candidates. Today, the Democratic party repre- 
sents business interests much more than it does labor." 

Today, corporations also dominate our culture. "Much of the nation's physical 
space, outdoors and indoors, is now a private preserve, carrying the messages and 
culture of the corporations that dominate economic and political life."" The book, 
Market Madness, provides suggestions to overcome the incessant marketing ads 
that we constantly face. Ads promote cigarettes, alcoholic beverages, and junk food 
which damage our health, while violence on TV promotes crime and a value 
system alien to our heritage. Sporting events are surrounded by corporate images. 
Shopping addiction is a 20th century disease. 

"Not only through propaganda and socialization but also through 'good 
works,' or the appearance of such, do capitalists achieve hegemonic legitimacy. 
The ruthless industrialist becomes the generous philanthropist. ...The primary goal 
of capitalist cultural dominance is not to provide us with nice concerts and muse- 
ums but to give capitalism's exploitative reality a providential appearance, so that 
people learn not only to accept, but to admire and appreciate, the leadership and 
stewardship of the owning class....'"* People in television and artists in many 
fields often cannot promote their views or artistic creations if it goes against the 
corporate view. Libraries, theaters, and performing arts centers are increasingly 
under corporate control because of the need for money. Our culture and entertain- 
ment are increasingly determined by a small number of network executives and 
distributors. Museums have become "public relations agents for the interests of 
big business and its ideological allies."" 

Corporate amusement parks like Disneyland and Sea World and the shopping 
mall culture are now the norm of society. The town square, as a center for gather- 
ing and shopping, has been replaced by the corporate-owned mall. Various court 
decisions support mall owners' right to prevent distribution of material. Political 
expression is often banned. In 1985 a New York Appeals Court held that a mall 
owner could ban political leaflets saying the state's Bill of Rights "governed the 
rights of citizens with respect to their government and not the rights of private 
individuals against private individuals." To this court, a corporation can violate 
any of our civil rights and the law offers no protection. A dissenting judge 
protested: "In the past, those who had ideas they wished to communicate to the 
public had the unquestioned right to disseminate those ideas in the open market- 
place. Now that the marketplace has a roof over it, and is called a mall, we should 
not abridge that right."" New Jersey and several other states have given limited 
rights to protest in privately owned malls." 

Corporate propaganda has for decades infiltrated the schools which need 
money. Schools put ads on buses and broadcast music with commercials, while 
businesses provide free supplies with ads. Teachers have lost control over the 
curriculum, and it is hard for students to differentiate between education and 
advertising. Channel One television with corporate ads now reaches 350,000 class- 
rooms. 4 " Corporations and foundations "have altered academic priorities, reduced 
the importance of teaching, degraded the integrity of academic journals, and deter- 
mined what research is conducted at universities. The social costs of this influence 
have been lower-quality education, a reduction in academic freedom, and a covert 



Rise of the Corporate State 109 



transfer of resources from the public to the private sector."* 1 Universities and 
nonprofit organizations provide special services and trained personnel for the 
corporations. Covert Action said scientific research is for sale to corporate 
money." Corporate controlled science is confusing the public and influencing the 
politicians." The cost of higher education rose 170 percent in the past decade, but 
this is being used to subsidize corporate influence in the universities. Corporate 
research is more important than teaching as corporate-funded think tanks, endowed 
chairs, consulting jobs, and research grants become the norm at universities. 

Children have become addicted to TV, junk food, and pop music while family 
interaction and control is increasingly subverted by corporate entertainment. 
Children are taught to become good corporate citizens by learning to consume, 
while both parents are forced to work away from the home because incomes keep 
falling. As wages dropped in the early 1970s, women went to work and the size of 
families shrank. The deliberate weakening of the family and the sense of commu- 
nity has made it easier to gradually introduce a new system of values that moves 
our society away from traditional values to suit the needs of corporate America and 
the new world order. 

Even our religious and patriotic holidays have been desecrated by the corpora- 
tions. Corporations have methodically worked for decades to influence the 
churches." Christmas has become a contest to see who can buy and sell the most. 
The love of Christ has become incidental. Lincoln and Washington's birthdays 
have become Presidents Day, which has become a contest to find the best furniture 
deals. The Statute of Liberty is now used in a TV ad to sell cars. None of our 
cultural heritage is safe from the corporate onslaught. 

More recently, corporate greed has infected medicine as HMOs interfere with 
the rights and judgments of doctors and patients. Doctors often have to get per- 
mission from accountants before they can recommend expensive treatments. A 
patient's health is determined by the all-powerful dollar." 

"The diminution of public expression and influence that can be found is not 
the consequence of a decline in national creativity or some other organic disability. 
It is the result of deliberate and successful efforts to reduce, even eliminate, the 
public realm in favor of the corporate sector. ...The corporate envelopment of 
public expression and creativity has been a direct outgrowth of the enormous 
expansion of corporate wealth and power in the postwar decades. ...The phenomenal 
growth of American capitalism in the years after 1945 helps to explain the deep 
penetration of corporate values and influence in American politics, law, education, 
culture, and life overall." The corporations also led the way into international 
alliances which were never a part of our history." 

"The drive to privatize and bring under corporate management as many 
elements of economic and social activity as possible in the last half century has 
tipped the balance of democratic existence to an uncomfortable precariousness 
....There is no assurance that the corporate governors in America are inoculated 
against the fascist (strong state) solution to a politically threatening crisis." There 
has been "the erosion of democratic principle and practice in the informational- 
cultural sphere. Given this weakening of the national democratic fabric, the advent 
of the coercive state is hardly precluded."" 

Various political commentators have warned that unlimited and unaccountable 
corporate power is not compatible with our traditions of constitutional govern- 
ment. The Founders understood that each class would press for too much power, 



110 Treason The New World Order 



so institutional checks were necessary to balance the various segments of society. 
Madison said the diffusion of power among a multiplicity of factions helped guar- 
antee that no one special interest group could ever gain control of the federal gov- 
ernment to control the rest of society. Different groups counterbalanced each other. 
Madison and Hamilton were especially influenced by Montesquieu's and Aquinas' 
notion of separating and dividing powers throughout society. The Founders feared 
concentrated economic power, so only 40 corporations were charted when our 
Republic was established. Just as the shared power between the states and federal 
government has been broken by the dangerous growth of federal power, the 
corporate elite have now gained so much power that the counterbalancing power of 
other interest groups is not sufficient. Pluralism, the interaction of conflicting 
interest groups, no longer works. You cannot have a free society when one 
segment of society becomes so dominant, and we cannot depend on the federal 
government to be a balancing arbitrator. This is the heart of our predicament. 

The traditional pluralist model of many different groups and citizens actively 
involved in politics presenting a counterbalance to each other is no longer valid in 
corporate-controlled America. "A substantial part of government in the U.S. has 
come under the influence or control of narrowly based and largely autonomous 
elites. ...The distinction between the public and the private. ..has been compromised 
far more deeply than we like to acknowledge.... The very idea of constitutionalism 
sometimes seems to be placed in question."*" 

"Today's emerging tyranny emanates from a New King, from a nonliving 
power center composed at its core of monolithic corporate entities encased and 
protected by endless layers of government bureaucracies. ...The New King's princi- 
pal means of control is the media that sells us the myths of freedom.... A New 
King was crowned when we capitulated to a regime that was no longer sensitive to 
people but to non-people — to corporations, to money, and to power." 4 ' 

"The growth of corporate. ..enterprise has produced a social milieu in which 
individual liberties or freedoms are not highly valued...." There has taken place "a 
constitutional change of the greatest magnitude — the fusion of economic and polit- 
ical power into the corporate state, American style. ...In the corporate state, control 
by the citizenry is not possible. Nor. ..is control of the apparatus of the state by 
legislative organs. ...Legislators act less as a check on the bureaucracy than as a 
part of the decisional process. In so doing, they do not represent the citizens of the 
nation." They represent various interest groups. "The elite has never been reluctant 
to use violence when considered necessary to stamp out threats, internal or exter- 
nal." Attacks on the labor movement have certainly demonstrated this. If full 
repression takes hold in America, it will be announced under the banner of free- 
dom. Huey Long once said if fascism is ever introduced into America it will be 
used in the name of anti-fascism."' 

"The new partnership (between government and business) is emerging at the 
same time that a vast conglomerate merger movement concentrates a larger portion 
of our national wealth in the hands of a smaller group of corporations. The two 
forces accentuate each other, producing a unique brand of corporate state in which 
the government and private sectors threaten to coalesce in a way that could be 
antithetical to democracy itself. Countervailing forces — in industry, government, 
and even in organized labor — are meshing in power alliances that can signify the 
formation of an elitist group with the power to determine the course it wishes to 



Rise of the Corporate State 111 



follow quite independent of the customary processes of popular democratic partici- 
pation."" Calvin Coolidge once said: "The business of government is business." 

Many large corporations have laid off thousands of workers despite the growth 
of profits and sales." High unemployment is now accepted as the norm because 
the corporate controlled press tells us this is acceptable. Millions of Americans 
have been forced to accept low-paying jobs. The percent of Americans working for 
Fortune 500 companies has dropped from over 20 percent of non-farm employees 
in 1973 to half that in 1994. It remains to be seen if the political influence of 
these corporations will also drop as they abandon America. 

There is too much centralized and unchecked corporate power today for any 
Republic to survive, especially if the people are to have a voice in government. 
Every modern industrial society must learn to control the power of the large 
corporations and still protect the rights of its workers. During the New Deal many 
felt that a large federal government would resolve this problem. Recently Arthur 
Schlesingler, Jr. warned that to weaken the federal government will not return 
power to the people, but will instead transfer power to the large corporations." 
Liberals such as John Kenneth Galbraith, in American Capitalism: The Theory of 
Countervailing Power, said competing corporations balanced each other. In past 
years many felt the labor unions were a counterbalance to big business, but that 
clearly is also not true. 

To restore competition many large banks and conglomerates should be broken 
up with stronger regulation and antitrust laws; otherwise, political intrigue against 
our government and way of life will continue. Tighter rules should be established 
to limit the ability of ex-government officials to work for corporations, especially 
as lobbyists, while government regulations that weaken labor unions should be 
removed. Restoring state sovereignty and having the states work together would 
weaken corporate power, because the corporations would then have to work with 
51 governments instead of one central government which they now dominate. The 
federal government must not be allowed to continue as a vehicle to expand corpo- 
rate control over our lives. 

Investor activism and boycotts to influence corporate policy are constructive. 
People from labor, environment, minorities, and local communities should be on 
the boards of large corporations, and employee ownership, as with United Airlines, 
is helpful. By the 1970s, seven European countries required employees to be on 
corporate boards. This has resulted in less labor trouble, improved productivity, 
and generally has not limited corporate profits. Such a policy should be required by 
law in the U.S. Corporations must be made accountable to the community and 
workers and not just to stockholders. The huge sums of money in pension funds 
should be used to support the infrastructure and community investment and should 
not be used for leveraged corporate buyouts and mergers. Some stockholder rights 
and profits should be transferred to workers, and society should insist that corpora- 
tions remain out of the political arena. 

As long as there was not too much government interference in people's daily 
lives and living standards continued to rise, people believed, as the media assured 
us, that the corporate elite believed in the political values that have been the basis 
of our constitutional government. Except during the populist era and the great 
depression, people weren't loo concerned about growing corporate power. Today, 
this has changed and more people are very concerned about how the corporations 



112 Treason The New World Order 



and banks dominate politics and all aspects of society. The goal of corporations is 
to make money not to enrich the ethical, cultural, and social fabric of society. 

Recently various groups have formed to curtail corporate power. Some want 
to require federal corporate charters to have minimum standards of corporate 
conduct. That path would further enhance federal and corporate power. Instead the 
Constitution's commerce clause should be used to require minimum standards that 
states must meet when they charter a corporation involved in interstate commerce. 
The Boston-based Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy wants to again 
require limited corporate charters, reestablish the people's control over corpora- 
tions, and remove corporate constitutional rights. In extreme cases, when a 
corporation repeatedly violates the law, as recently happened with a Japanese bank 
in New York, its right to exist should be revoked as was often done in the past. 
Once again corporations must prove that they exist to serve the public welfare.' 4 

C. Wright Mills spent many years studying the "power elite" in America 
concluding that the corporate elite make the key political decisions while political 
parties occupy a secondary middle level." The corporate elite represent a private 
economic and political power that is unaccountable to the people. Since the 1994 
election it has been understood that the American people want less federal govern- 
ment control. In time it will be equally understood that the people are also tired of 
being controlled by large corporations, as is increasingly happening in the new 
world order. 



113 



Chapter IX 
Rise of the Transnational Corporations 



"There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity 
remains." 

Theodore Roosevelt 

"The corporations. ..have successfully leveraged economic power into political 
power that undercuts the Constitution." 

Charles Reich 



The growth of modern transnational or multinational corporations has created 
many problems for our constitutional form of government. These changes have 
come upon us almost unannounced and with little recognition by the general 
public, although in recent years more people are examining the implications of 
this development. From trade and banking to tourism, human rights, and envi- 
ronmental concerns many activities are now global in outlook and influence. 
These cross-border economic, social, cultural, and political interactions are in- 
creasingly being directed and controlled by large corporations not by governments. 
Especially with the end of the cold war, economic not military competition rules 
supreme. Globalization represents the radical transformation of the global eco- 
nomy to benefit large corporations. 

Nations have lost the power to control their economics, and financial markets 
often determine the success or failure of government programs. The Boston Globe, 
on April 11, 1994, said: "Corporate taxes are crumbling in many industrial coun- 
tries as companies move their booked profits from one locale to another, telling 
different stories to different tax collectors." In 1993, the General Accounting Office 
told Congress that 40 percent of corporations with assets of at least $250 million 
paid under $100,000 in U.S. income taxes. Dateline, on August 18, 1995, said the 
U.S. government isn't properly taxing foreign corporations in the U.S., because 
U.S. corporations would then be forced to pay higher taxes overseas. About 75 
percent of foreign corporations with U.S. operations pay no U.S. taxes. 

Large corporations now can compete on equal terms with governments. They 
are accountable to no one, as the BCCI scandal demonstrated. Multinational 
corporations can move their production to countries where wage and production 
costs are much lower. Until recently, this could not be done easily because of 
political considerations and a lack of capital and technology. However, there has 
been an increased fusion of economic and political power because of increased 
capital flows and technological advances. There is now one global work force, 
with labor far cheaper in third world nations. National interest is determined by 
what industry, not the people, wants. In 1973 George Ball told the House 
Committee on Foreign Affairs: "The multinational corporation not only promises 



114 Treason The New World Order 



the most efficient use of world resources, but as an institution, it poses the 
greatest challenge to the power of a nation-state since the temporal position of the 
Roman Church began to decline in the 15th century." 

The rise of the corporate state has given transnational corporations the power 
to threaten the very existence of democratic institutions throughout the world. 
Local political movements and regulations have been weakened, while interna- 
tional organizations like the World Bank are beyond democratic control. Steve 
Solomon, in The Confidence Game, said many governments are transferring power 
to central banks. Institutions and agreements like the World Bank, GATT, 
NAFTA International Monetary Fund (IMF), UN, Inter-American Development 
Bank, World Economic Forum, Ford and Rockefeller Foundations were established 
by the corporate elite "to create a new, highly undemocratic governing structure for 
the global economy. These institutions are imposing a global corporate agenda 
designed to extract wealth and resources from poorer countries and communities 
and concentrate them among the global elite." 1 Representing the corporate elite, the 
World Bank supports programs that increase trade at the expense of social stabil- 
ity, the environment, and worker welfare. 2 Under the guise of free trade, corporate 
control over our lives increases while national sovereignty is weakened. The goal 
is global economic union to create political union and a one world government. 
Henry Kissinger, on July 18, 1993 in the Los Angeles Times, said: "What Cong- 
ress will have before it is not a conventional trade agreement but the architecture 
of a new international system. ..a first step toward a new world order." NAFTA 
represents "the vital first step for a new kind of community of nations." 

As economic power grew and expanded overseas, the multinational corp- 
orations received government assistance to manage their economic empires. 
Greater corporate involvement and interaction with the government required greater 
secrecy to maintain the myth of democracy to keep the people quiet. Meanwhile 
corporate control over the people grows, labor unions continue to weaken, 
disillusionment with government grows, and free market ideology rules. With 
little accountability to workers or the public, multinational corporations now have 
tremendous political power in the U.S." Accompanying this transformation has 
been a growing transfer of bad corporate debt to the government. 

James Morgan, in the London Financial Times, described the "de facto world 
government" now forming in the "new imperial age." This world government will 
represent and serve the multinational corporations, preferably with the consent of 
the ignorant masses, but, if necessary, force and terror have and will continue to be 
used. The military arm of the coming one world government, for now, is money 
and capital flows. In the immediate years ahead, the growing UN army, its armed 
agent NATO, and the disarmament of individual nations will make countries pow- 
erless to protect their rights and sovereignty. 

The West has used international institutions, military power, and economic 
resources to maintain political and economic dominance over third world nations. 
Democracy through a manipulation of market forces is being used as a weapon to 
promote the profits of transnational corporations. Foreign aid increasingly re- 
presents the corporate agenda. The goal of U.S. foreign policy is to promote 
capitalism, not democracy. Especially in China, Africa, and Latin America politi- 
cal reform is cosmetic because of the growing influence of multinational corpora- 
tions. 4 Trade with China is no longer limited because of human rights, but a trade 
war almost developed when China illegally reproduced patented goods. Charles 



Rise of the Transnational Corporations 115 



Lane, in The New Republic, recently said he might be denied some lunches at the 
CFR because he supported what many Republicans and the people demand: sharp 
cuts in foreign aid. Lane even called the arguments of those defending foreign aid 
acts of desperation. Foreign aid has often been an extension of the national secu- 
rity state and part of the vast corporate welfare programs of the federal government. 
It has for too many years been used to promote dictators who have nothing to do 
with our moral values. Foreign aid should end or be sharply reduced and be used 
primarily where the people actually benefit.' 

U.S. government agencies, such as the U.S. Information Agency and the 
Agency for International Development, promote false or "low intensity democ- 
racy" around the world.* It costs the U.S. less to do this than to support an open 
and often unstable dictatorship, and social stability is more important in the global 
economy. The Trilateral Commission called for flexible methods to increase social 
control with less coercive methods. 7 A small group of elites legitimatize their rule 
with carefully controlled elections. The goal is stability, preferably through 
persuasion, for economic gain.* These ideas were promoted by Joseph Schumpeter, 
who said democracy only means that people have the opportunity to accept or 
refuse the men who rule them.' 

Third world governments are usually controlled by a ruling elite who may 
terrorize or kill those who interfere with official policy. Multinational corpora- 
tions are relatively free to operate in these countries with favorable terms that 
included cheap labor, low taxes, and limited social programs, while local poverty 
grows as income distribution becomes more unequal. Local elites are bribed to 
control the people and prevent unions and dangerous popular movements. The 
welfare of the people is irrelevant. Democratic dialogue interferes with corporate 
efficiency. Examining how transnational corporations act in third world countries 
offers a clue to what is planned for the U.S., Europe, Canada, Japan, and 
Australia. In a one world government, transnational corporations wouldn't have to 
worry about inconveniences like strong labor unions, grass root revolts, or envi- 
ronmental issues. People who raised these issues will simply disappear. 

Different countries strive to bring new corporations into their region by offer- 
ing numerous benefits in bidding wars. Nations are forced to compete with each 
other for foreign investment and aid, which lowers the business costs of the 
multinational corporations but also lowers incomes and weakens the social and 
economic fabric of many nations. The result is increased unemployment, lower 
wages, more debt, weakened infrastructure, and slower economic growth. "The 
world is being moved by state-corporate policy towards a kind of third world 
model, with sectors of great wealth, a huge mass of misery, and a large superflu- 
ous population, lacking any rights because they contribute nothing to profit- 
making for the rich." 1 " 

Consumers in third world countries are sold inferior products by the multina- 
tionals through sophisticated marketing techniques that include Western logos and 
brand names. 11 More expensive Western medical drugs replace native folk 
medicines that are much cheaper and often more effective. Providing large scale 
food aid to third world nations has damaged their agriculture base and made them 
dependent on western bankers and corporations to survive. We spend billions to 
provide food aid, yet for decades far less aid was provided to make these nations 
self sufficient in food production. This dependency made it easier to control and 
exploit the natural resources of third world nations. 



116 Treason The New World Order 



There is growing resistance to the expanding power of the corporate elite and 
Western cultural dominance of globalization, as the world's living standards drop. 
In Bangalore, India, 500,000 farmers protested GATT provisions that allowed cor- 
porations to limited their freedom to use certain seeds. Hundreds of thousands of 
farmers protested against GATT in the Philippines. The urban slums of third 
world nations, like Brazil, were made much worse during the Green Revolution. 
Overly efficient farming drove people off the land into the cities weakening fami- 
lies, destroying social stability, and leaving people unable to support themselves. 
Over 3.1 billion people live off the land. If farming productivity in the third world 
matches Western nations, at least two billion people will become unproductive. 

Between 1980 and 1992, Mexican manufacturing productivity rose 41 percent, 
and real wages fell 32 percent as Mexico entered the international market place. 
The result was a revolt in Chiapas, Mexico partly because NAFTA helped the 
ruling elite but not the people. The Mexican rebels called NAFTA "the death 
certificate for the indigenous people of Mexico." In Mexico perhaps 800,000 small 
farmers will be forced off their land and have to move into the cities unemployed. 
Hundreds of U.S. corporations have established factories along the U.S. /Mexican 
border. People trying to unionize are fired or assaulted, environmental conditions 
are among the poorest in the world, and wages remain low with the active support 
of the Mexican government. 

The Mexican economic collapse shows how our government continues to 
represent the bankers, not the American people. William Seidman, past chairman 
of the FDIC and of the RTC, said Wall Street stood to lose $10-15 billion from 
the Mexico collapse, so it naturally turned to Washington to be saved. Desperate 
to protect Wall Street and stop people from saying NAFTA was a disaster, Clin- 
ton, without congressional approval, violated the Constitution by committing $9 
billion and then a further S20 billion credit line to help Mexico. Over 90 percent 
of the funds available in the Exchange Stabilization Fund, an emergency agency 
established in 1934 only to defend the dollar, was illegally used. In July, 1995, the 
House voted 245 to 183 to halt further disbursement of the remaining $8.5 billion 
in the Clinton loan, but the House leadership blocked implementing this vote. 
Numerous domestic projects are slashed or cancelled yet, at least $29 billion was 
available to rescue Wall Street, and The Nation said Mexico had secretly receive 
$12 billion in credits from the U.S., Japan, and Europe in the months before the 
late 1994 debt crisis. While these loans were meant to support Mexico and the 
peso, much of the money actually went to Mexican and foreign elites." 

As the weakened dollar demonstrates, there is no way paying such large sums 
of money could be justified as being in America's national interests. Patrick 
Buchanan said: "The looting of America on behalf of the new world order has 
begun." According to The Economist, by June, 1994 U.S. banks had Latin Amer- 
ican loans totaling $50 billion. Time magazine said that 380,000 jobs will be lost 
in the next four years from NAFTA, and there will be between $13-28 billion in 
lost output." Now that NAFTA has passed many corporations have broken their 
promises and moved more jobs outside the U.S. Current laws often provide tax 
incentives to corporations when they close plants and export jobs. 

The Mexico crisis also exemplifies how our news is managed. The "experts" 
the national media used to speak about Mexico often came from financial firms 
with large investments in Mexico. Between 1992 and 1994 the largest holder of 
Mexican stocks and bonds was Goldman Sachs, which is the firm Secretary of the 



Rise of the Transnational Corporations 117 



Treasury Robert Rubin worked for. He played a major role in arranging the 
Mexican bailout. Ralph Nader said Rubin should have recused himself from the 
Mexico loan because of his obvious conflict of interest. Goldman Sachs has also 
been a major financial supporter of Clinton. When the Mexican president visited 
the U.S. in October, 1995 the press praised Mexico for repaying $700 million due 
on the loan; however, the press ignored the fact that $2 billion was then due, but 
Mexico lacked the money to repay that on time. Today Mexico's debt is $153 
billion, which is much more than in 1982. 

Dr. Felipe Arismendi, a UN economist, and certain Mexican officials, such as 
Hugo del Valle, who work for the UN in New York, said Wall Street firms were 
warned in advance by the Federal Reserve Bank about the collapsing Mexico 
economy, so they withdrew about $30 billion. Newsday headlined: "Surprise 
Profits for Top N.Y. Banks." The Mexican bailout was a bank relief act. Citibank, 
Chase Manhattan, and Chemical Bank all made considerable profits, despite having 
large holdings in Mexico. Mexico spent most of its foreign reserves throughout 
1994, and the Federal Reserve was aware of what was happening. 

In late 1993 the director of the Ethos Capital Management Inc. in New York 
said: "There are things that would disturb any investor when you talk about re- 
defining income distribution." Wall Street does not want the Mexican people to 
increase their wealth. A leaked Chase Manhattan memo on January 13, 1995 
warned that the Chiapas uprising should be crushed to calm the international 
investment community, and the ruling parly should consider committing electoral 
fraud to maintain control and stability. According to the memo it would be 
frivolous to have social and economic reforms and improve people's lives, because 
it was more important to repay international investors. This memo was sent to 
100 major investment groups. John Sweeney, of the Heritage Foundation, in a 
January 25, 1995 report also called for slopping the Chiapas rebellion to restore 
investor confidence. On February 9, 1995 the Mexican government responded by 
conducting military operations against the rebels." 

In the future, how many hundreds of billions of dollars will U.S. taxpayers 
have to pay to bailout Wall Street in other failed business ventures. Other nations 
with unsound fiscal policies will figure they can also be rescued by American 
taxpayers. Already the Wall Street Journal reported May 4, 1995 that the previous 
week the U.S. Treasury Department had made a loan to Argentina via the Ex- 
change Stabilization Fund. 1 ' Walker Todd, ex-attorney for the Federal Reserve, 
reported in the Sacramento Bee that U.S. officials were planning to rescue 
Japanese banks by having the Federal Reserve, supported by the Treasury Depart- 
ment, purchase up to $50 billion worth of U.S. securities from Japanese banks. 
Details of this scam were leaked to Todd by government officials. Since Japanese 
voters are unwilling to pay for the mistakes of their banks the U.S. will help. Part 
of this scam was discussed by Rep. Leach on October 16, 1995." 

The IMF said 10 nations could have trouble similar to Mexico's. For markets 
to work, investors must also suffer for their mistakes partly to prevent worst 
mistakes from occurring. Risk and reward must be preserved. On the same day the 
$40 billion Mexican loan was proposed by Clinton, the Democrats said the party 
needed to get back to its roots with labor and the minorities. How stupid they 
think the people are! 

Despite the Mexican fiasco, Clinton is proceeding to expand NAFTA 
throughout Latin America." The book, Western Hemisphere Economic Integra- 



118 Treason The New World Order 



lion, which is dedicated to David Rockefeller, explains why the Western Hemi- 
sphere should be joined in an economic union. Negotiations are underway for the 
entrance of Chile into NAFTA, although attempts to fast track such legislation in 
Congress failed. Newt Gingrich, Henry Kissinger, and others want a North 
American and European union called a North Atlantic Free Trade Area (FTA), and 
said it should merge with NAFTA." Naturally The Economist" and Secretary of 
State Warren Christopher" support this next step towards a one world govern- 
ment. On March 3, 1996 Christopher was in Brazil urging adaptation of the FTA. 
The May/June, 1996 issue of Foreign Affairs contained an article by Charles A. 
Kupchan promoting a "transatlantic union" between Europe and the U.S, and 
Forbes on July 1, 1996 had an article promoting a transatlantic union, partly 
because this would limit American protectionism. 

Plans to create one European currency by January 1, 1999 are part of the one 
world agenda to have a united Europe. At a 1983 economic summit, Ronald Rea- 
gan said: "An integrated world economy needs a common monetary standard. ...But, 
no national currency will do — only a world currency will work." In 1984 Foreign 
Affairs called for creating a single common world currency and "a pooling of 
monetary sovereignty." 21 In an editorial, The Economist said creating one Europ- 
ean currency was part of the "broader designs for Europe's political future" that 
included plans for one police force and one foreign policy." Bernard Connolly, a 
17-year career Eurocrat, wrote The Rotten Heart of Europe, harshly attacking the 
single currency and the hidden political objectives to promote the corporate elite at 
the expense of the people. Promoters of one European currency will attempt to 
establish one central bank, which will damage each nation's sovereignty. 

Sir James Goldsmith said GATT will be a disaster for the industrial nations 
because unemployment will greatly increase and wages will drop sharply." On 
November 15, 1994 Goldsmith spoke before the Senate Committee on Com- 
merce. He said: "What we are witnessing is the divorce of the interests of the 
major corporations and the interests of society as a whole... .We have a system 
...being proposed. ..which will result in massive unemployment, massive hem- 
orrhaging ofjobs and capital, but which will increase corporate prof its.... There is 
absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the World Trade Organization (WTO) is a 
major diminution of sovereignty. ...GATT, the global free trade, is the replacement 
Utopia for Marxism. It is another one of these mad Utopias."" 

On June 10, 1994 Rep. Gingrich testified before the House Committee on 
Ways and Means about GATT. He said: "We need to be honest about the fact that 
we are transferring from the U.S. at a practical level significant authority to a new 
organization. This is a transformational moment. I would feel better if the people 
who favor this would just be honest about the scale of the change. ...This is not 
just another trade agreement.... We have to be very careful, because it is a very big 
transfer of power. ...(and) We are not likely to take (our authority) back."" Just 
before Gatt was ratified, Senator Hollings said: "This Gatt agreement is being 
pushed by David Rockefeller and the Trilateral Commission." 

The New York Times on May 23, 1992 included an article entitled "The End 
of Sovereignty" promoting the new European system. However, after 20 years, the 
Common Market has been a disaster for social stability and the economic well- 
being of many Europeans. In the last 20 years, the GNP of France has grown by 
80 percent while unemployment has grown from 400,000 to over five million. 
Over four million are jobless in Germany. This is what awaits the industrial world 



Rise of the Transnational Corporations 11< 



with GATT." Goldsmith called for replacing global free trade with regional free 
trade. Instead of specialized economies, there should be diversified economies with 
the free movement of capital and managed trade to protect jobs, social stability, 
and small businesses. Too often experts rely on Wall Street, forgetting about the 
rest of the nation. Wall Street and Main Street are not the same. 

Sharply increased long-term unemployment and slowed growth in Europe 
developed partly because jobs were exported as tariffs came down with interna- 
tional trade agreements. Corporations say the solution is to reduce the role of 
government in business, cut taxes, and privatization to make businesses more 
efficient. However, expanded trade can benefit all only if it also protects labor 
rights and wage standards. Working closer with workers and having better relations 
in the work place can enhance productivity. Economic growth should be used to 
increase social stability and the happiness of the people. 

In America wages have been dropping for over 20 years, while corporate prof- 
its continue to grow as globalization expands. The traditional lie between 
corporate profits and better wages for workers no longer exists in the U.S. or 
Europe. The manufacturing base is being exported with millions of jobs lost. 
M.I.T. economist Lester Thurow said: "No country without a revolution or a 
military defeat has ever experienced such a sharp shift in the distribution of 
earnings as America in the last generation." Using the media the large corporations 
have engineered a silent revolution. 

Many highly trained and educated people cannot find work, or they are forced 
to take low paying service jobs. Once unemployment benefits end, after about six 
months, these people are removed from the unemployment statistics. Many more 
people are unemployed than what the government and press admit. This is partly 
why so many people are nervous about their jobs, despite claims that the economy 
is booming. Workers increasingly have no value except to increase corporate 
profits and power. The third worldization of the U.S. is making many people poor 
with a small elite in control. The better off the people are, the harder it is to 
control them. When people are kept poor and are forced to work harder for less 
money, they have less time and energy for politics. Even Time admitted that the 
middle class is shrinking while the poor and very rich increase." In October 24, 
1994 Time said the U.S. has the largest gap between the rich and poor of any 
major industrial nation. Upward mobility for U.S. workers is no longer assured." 

Since 1992 Congress has permitted U.S. corporations to hire over one 
million foreigners in two programs. The Permanent Alien Certification and H-1B 
visa programs allows companies to replace U.S. employees with cheap foreign 
workers. The companies are supposed to first try to hire capable U.S. workers but 
this is usually a farce, and many high-tech jobs go to foreign workers. It is easier 
and cheaper for the corporations to import trained foreigners, instead of educating 
Americans. Taxpayers pay S60 million a year to administer this corporate welfare. 
Even the White House and other government agencies hire foreign workers. The 
New York Times admitted that tens of thousands of highly skilled professionals 
have been laid off so the large corporations can import this cheap labor supply." 
Senator Simpson's recent attempt to limit this influx of foreign workers was 
defeated by the corporate onslaught. 

Charles Lasch, in The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy, 
described the contempt, arrogance, and scorn the corporate elite feel towards the 
American people. They no longer believe in the Constitution, so the elite act 



120 Treason The New World Order 



irresponsibly. We are heading towards a two-class society, with the ruling elite 
feeling little loyalty or responsibility towards the U.S. The new patriotism is 
corporate profits and self-aggrandizement. Civic responsibility is sacrificed for 
profits in the global market. Traditional public institutions like political parties 
are used to increase power and control over the people. United to an "international 
culture of work and leisure" our elite rulers feel "indifferent to the prospect of 
national decline.""' The ruling elite have more in common with their counterparts 
in Hong Kong and Frankfurt than with the American people. 

Leaders of multinational corporations represent their businesses; they do not 
act in the best interests of the U.S. or of other nations within which they reside. 
The U.S. has for years contributed tens of billions of dollars to the IMF, so banks 
could collect on their loans to third world nations. Robert B. Reich said that, 
increasingly, U.S. owned corporations have no special relationship with Ameri- 
cans, so it makes no sense to trust these corporations with our national competit- 
iveness. "The interests of American-owned corporations may or may not coincide 
with those of the American people.'" 1 A vice-president of Colgate-Palmolive said: 
"The U.S. does not have an automatic call on our resources. There is no mindset 
that puts this country first."" The U.S. Bureau of Economic Statistics said 20 
percent of all U.S. imports come from foreign subsidiaries or affiliates of U.S. 
firms. Many large U.S. corporations like Citicorp (51 percent), Chevron (55 per- 
cent), and Gillette (66 percent) have shifted much of their assets overseas. In the 
past, wealth was usually concentrated in a region or nation and a particular indus- 
try. Today, wealth is more purely financial and easily shifts between nations. 

The ability of money to move quickly between nations has created job 
insecurity, falling incomes, rising debt, and a weakened middle class. Lasch, in 
describing the collapse of the middle class in third world nations, said this same 
fate may await the U.S. The existence of a trading and manufacturing class has 
been crucial to establishing a stable nation state for hundreds of years. Aristotle 
said a large middle class "has a great steadying influence and checks the opposing 
extremes" of the rich and poor. Once a large and stable middle class develops, there 
is always a demand for self-government. Unrestrained market forces destroy com- 
munities and traditional family and spiritual values, which ultimately weakens 
national sovereignty. "The revolt of the elites against time-honored traditions of 
locality, obligation, and restraint may yet unleash a war of all against all."" 

There is a need for more community action to mobilize people to counteract 
corporate power. Ralph Nader said: "Societies rot from the top down. They re- 
construct from the bottom up." We should help people mobilize at the community 
level, not ask what Washington will do for the people. The U.S. should promptly 
leave GATT and NAFTA. H.R. 499 to withdraw from NAFTA should be sup- 
ported. Committing $29 billion or more to save Wall Street in Mexico and defend 
a poorly constructed trade agreement is ridiculous. We should protect our sov- 
ereignty, workers jobs, and use trade to improve our standard of living. 

All parties can benefit from international trade agreements but only if they are 
properly structured. NAFTA and GATT represent attempts to use trade as a 
weapon to destroy national sovereignty to establish the one world government. In 
1974 Foreign Affairs, the voice of the CFR, published an article slating: "The 
'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than the top 
down.... An end run around sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish 
much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault." Richard Gardner, a CFR 



Rise of the Transnational Corporations 121 



member and past assistant deputy secretary of state, called for world government, 
surrender of U.S. sovereignty, strengthening the central role of the UN, increased 
use of UN troops, and changing "the ground rules for the conduct of international 
trade" such as with GATT. Strengthening international agencies such as the World 
Bank and UN Development Programs was seen as strengthening international 
agencies and weakening the influence of individual nations in world affairs. These 
new policies "will subject countries to an unprecedented degree of international 
surveillance over up to now sacrosanct 'domestic' policies." Gardner believes this 
approach "can produce some remarkable concessions of sovereignty that could not 
be achieved on an across-the-board basis."" 

The GATT agreement regulates governments much more than businesses; 
governments must adjust their policies so corporations can grow. Under GATT, 
the WTO is creating panels to review and reject the laws of member states that 
interfere with international trade. Nations must comply or face sanctions. Before 
GATT passed, 42 state attorney generals told Clinton GATT was unconstitutional 
and it would cancel many state laws. Already Europe, Japan, and Canada have 
issued reports attacking U.S. federal and local laws as unfair barriers to free trade. 
Pesticide regulations, nutritional food labels, nuclear licensing, the Marine Mam- 
mal Protection Act involving tuna and dolphins, and court agreements allowing 
native Americans to protect their natural resources are called unfair non-tariff trade 
barriers. Based on U.S. ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and 
Political Rights, British lawyers tried to stop Texas from executing a convicted 
rapist-killer. Under NAFTA, Mexico has filed a complaint over a labor dispute 
with Sprint in San Francisco. This type of intervention in our internal affairs will 
become normal under GATT and NAFTA. Even small nations can now challenge 
and change U.S. laws. 

On January 17,1996 the WTO supported a claim by Venezuela and Brazil that 
the U.S. Clean Air Act discriminates against foreign oil refiners and this decision 
was upheld on appeal. Hundreds of consumer protection laws will be lost in this 
manner, which will also increase corporate profits. The corporations will say it is 
the fault of a foreign body, and the people will have no real recourse as they have 
already been sold out by their representatives. Phony politicians like Dole who 
voted for GATT complained about this decision but many similar decisions are 
now inevitable. 

Nations should join together and demand an international corporate code of 
conduct, with labor, health, and environmental rights and enforcement procedures. 
Unions should be allowed to organize. International organizations like the World 
Bank should be closed. Groups from different nations should work together to 
counterbalance the actions of the multinational corporations. Governments should 
adapt monetary policies that raise the people's economic standards and lessen the 
gap between the rich and poor." When a corporation closes U.S. factories to move 
jobs overseas, it should face a special tariff to import their products into the U.S. 

Drastic steps must be taken to restore balance to our trade with China and 
Japan. For too long we have been played like fools by these nations, especially 
since certain corporations benefit from this sharp trade imbalance. Secret stock 
ownership of many Japanese corporations by Wall Street is one reason why 
nothing has been accomplished to end the huge balance of trade deficit with Japan. 
"American Big Business was found at the time of the first World War to be linked 
to Japanese Big Business through the Harvey cartel...." Companies with 



122 Treason The New World Order 



investments in Japanese firms from early this century included GM, GE, Standard 
Oil, Westinghouse, Eastman Kodak, and Singer Sewing Machine. After World 
War II, Rockefeller agents bought into more Japanese companies at a sharp 
discount. This quiet interaction between Japanese and American corporations 
continues today.'" 

With Japan, free trade means unfair trade. Now that GATT has passed, Japan 
refuses to even negotiate with the U.S. about the huge trade imbalance. Instead 
they have turned to GATT mechanisms for protection. After 27 years, it is time to 
recognize that we must have managed trade with Japan. Even some commentators 
said the recent auto agreement with Japan was managed trade. We should sit down 
with Japan and China and develop a program over several years to restore an 
almost equal balance of trade. It is time to end the vast transfer of our economic 
wealth to other nations. The huge trade imbalance is more evidence that the 
Washington politicians represent economic interests not the American people. 

Historically Holland, England, and now America have shown that free trade 
causes serious problems for developed nations as wages are lowered and the 
manufacturing base is exported. The working classes benefited when foreign com- 
petition was controlled, as in early nineteenth century England and in the U.S. 
after World War II. Open immigration into the U.S. weakens U.S. sovereignty, 
keeps wages low, and limits the ability of unions to grow. This is partly why the 
national media supports immigration and attacks as racists those who want it 
limited. With open borders, corporate profits raise while U.S. wages drop. U.S. 
corporations go overseas for cheap labor while foreigners immigrate to the U.S. 
seeking higher wages. 

From the time of George Washington until World War II, except during the 
first world war, we had a policy of isolationism. However, while this policy kept 
us from foreign political alliances it also included managed trade, usually done to 
benefit America. As Benjamin Franklin said: "No nation was ever ruined by trade." 
Our economy and manufacturing base developed with economic treaties between 
various nations. In recent decades the corporate controlled press falsely claimed that 
the choice is only for free trade or isolationism and strict limits on trade. This is 
disinformation used to increase corporate profits and surrender U.S. sovereignty to 
the planned world government. Rep. Duncan Hunter, in a letter published in the 
March 18, 1996 Business Week, noted that free trade is a recent policy with a poor 
track record. We should return to our historical policy of managed trade which 
means that American jobs and sovereignty will again be protected. 

New Zealand has shown how populist policies and free-market reforms can 
benefit an entire nation, including the people and large corporations. After 10 years 
of reforms, New Zealand has a government surplus, low unemployment, and 59 
percent of all government employees have been fired." American corporations 
must be forced, through tax incentives and penalties, to bring manufacturing jobs 
back to the U.S. This would make it easier to remove more people from public 
welfare and unemployment compensation, which would also bring down taxes. 
There would also be improved social stability and less crime as more people 
worked. If the manufacturing base of the nation is destroyed, the middle class will 
be severely weakened. It is time to remind American multinational corporations 
that they have responsibilities to America. 



123 



Chapter X 

Rise of the National Security State: 
The Cold War and Democracy 



"No truly sophisticated proponent of repression would be stupid enough to shatter 
the facade of democratic institutions." 

Murray B. Levin 

"The cause of liberty becomes a mockery if the price to be paid is the wholesale 
destruction of those who are to enjoy liberty." 

Gandhi 



Part of the strategy to increase federal power and destroy state authority has 
been to shift from a Republic to a nation state with increased nationalism and an 
aggressive foreign policy. When is the last time you heard a politician refer to 
America as a Republic. The shift from a Republic to a nation state with an empire 
is part of the age-old battle of the few to control the many. Emotional appeals, 
however irrational, have historically been used to increase loyalty to the govern- 
ment. Appeals to nationalism and war provide a rationale to direct and control the 
people, to justify and promote the goals of the ruling elite. War discourages 
dissent and encourages conformity. External threats of communism provided an 
excuse for huge military expenditures and increased control of the people. 

The seeds of the national security state and our moral decline started with the 
Spanish American War in 1898. That war allowed both political parties to control 
rampaging populism, as people were diverted from criticizing the corporate elite 
and urged to rally around the flag. There had been a recent depression, the frontier 
was filling up, and as America's manufacturing base increased, the ruling elite fell 
foreign bases were needed to increase foreign exports. The people paid to develop 
an empire, while the ruling elite reaped the economic rewards from these foreign 
adventures. 

War was a logical continuation of America's imperialistic manifest destiny as 
the continental U.S. was fully occupied. In 1895 an editorial in the New York 
Journal of Commerce, then one of Americas main newspapers, criticized "the 
artificial patriotism being worked up at the present time" including "the fashion of 
hanging the flag from every schoolhouse and giving the boys military drill." The 
first time the pledge of allegiance to the flag look place in a schoolroom was in 
1892. The original pledge of allegiance was formulated by a socialist, Francis 
Bellamy. Today only the U.S. and the Philippines have an oath to their flag. 1 
Only gradually was it thought proper to hang flags at every school. While I am 
not criticizing saluting the flag, surely no one will challenge the patriotism of our 
forefathers, who for over a hundred years, did not feel it necessary or proper to 
pledge allegiance to the American flag as an emblem of their patriotism. 



124 Treason The New World Order 



Development of the national security state intensified during and after World 
War I, as the policy of isolation from involvement in foreign conflicts ended. 
Before the U.S. entered World War I, some agitated for entry into the war to "forge 
a national soul" for the country. They felt war would give rise to "a new religion 
of vital patriotism. ..of consecration to the State," and that a foreign war would fill 
people with "a strong sense of international duty." Instead of protecting our rights 
and freedoms with as little government as possible, the emphasis in the new 
America was to have more respect for a strong national government that we were 
indebted to. 

The new religion of the market economy was joined with the new religion of 
nationalism. We were no longer a Republic, with a strong independent people who 
relied on themselves with as little government as possible. Reverence for the 
Constitution was gradually replaced by a cull of the nation. 5 Some understood that 
the interventionalists wanted to replace the Republic with a feared nation state that 
would destroy the Republic. Senator William J. Stone said if we entered the Euro- 
pean war "We will never again have this same old Republic." 

Indeed, this period was filled with mass arrests with protest equated with 
disloyalty. Publications with unpatriotic ideas were banned from the mail, and 
there was little freedom of the press. The two political parties worked together, and 
people deemed radical were brutally suppressed. In 1917 the Attorney General said 
he had several hundred thousand citizens watching others to protect us from radical 
elements. Various immigrants, especially if they were union organizers, were 
deported as threats to the state. The red menace was equated with labor unrest, 
especially after Russia turned communist. The threat of communism was a 
convenient excuse to attack the labor movement. By 1920 the government had 
files on two million people. 

America has been in a continuous state of war since 1941. Historically wars 
have played a key role in increasing the state's power, size, and fiscal spending, 
and that has certainly been true in America. We have been at war during 20 percent 
of our history, yet all but five of the federal government cabinet posts and most 
federal agencies were established during a war. 1 James Madison said: "Of all the 
enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded. ...War is the 
parent of armies, from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies and debts, and 
taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of 
the few. ...No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." 4 
At the constitutional convention Madison also said: "A standing military force 
with an overgrown executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The 
means of defense against foreign danger have been always the instruments of 
tyranny at home." Tocqueville warned that "All those who seek to destroy the 
liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and the 
shortest means to accomplish it.'" Centralized power is essential to establish a 
dictatorship, and power is most easily centralized by war or by the expectation of 
war. "This centralizing tendency of war has made the rise of the state throughout 
much of history a disaster for human liberty and rights."* 

Many people called it a coup d'etat when President Kennedy was assassinated. 
It is more accurate to say the coup d'etat took place when the national security 
state was established in the late 1940s. "The cynicism of this coup d'etat was 
breath-taking. Officially we were doing nothing but trying to preserve freedom for 
ourselves and our allies from a ruthless enemy that was everywhere monolithic and 



Rise of the National Security State: The Cold War and Democracy 125 



all-powerful. Actually, the real enemy were those national security statesmen who 
had so dexterously hijacked the country, establishing military conscription in 
peacetime, overthrowing governments that did not please them, and finally keep- 
ing all but the very rich docile and jittery by imposing income taxes that 
theoretically went as high as 90 percent. That is quite an achievement in a country 
at peace.'" 

While the cold war often did not involved actual fighting, this period has had a 
major negative impact on basic American beliefs and institutions. The cold war 
was partly manufactured by the U.S. to maintain control over the people. The 
American people were lied to to create a vicious enemy, the Soviet Empire, to 
justify the cold war and arms race. According to R. Buckminster Fuller, during 
1947-1950 the invisible government decided to start the cold war to keep capital- 
ism in business and to prevent the Soviet Union from producing a higher standard 
of living then that which existed in the U.S." In 1950 Einstein said: "The men 
who possess real power in this country have no intention of ending the cold war." 

The view that the Soviets caused the cold war is wearing thin. In 1967 Arthur 
Schlesinger, Jr. claimed in Foreign Affairs that the West had to act against the 
Soviet Union because Stalin was paranoid. Although many non-therapists believe 
this, the historian William A. Williams demonstrated the fallacy of this view. For 
instance, there is no evidence that U.S. policy was ever based on such an opinion 
of Stalin. Instead, as Schlesinger acknowledged, Stalin took many actions hostile 
to the West only after the U.S. intervened in Eastern Europe and throughout the 
world." 

Especially since the 1960s, people like Walter La Feber and Waller Karp have 
increasingly said the U.S., not the Soviet Union, mainly initialed the cold war. 
Truman reneged on various Yalta agreements. The U.S. exaggerated the Soviet 
threat, calling most Soviet moves an attempt at world conquest, and unnecessarily 
spent the nation almost into bankruptcy by creating a permanent war economy. H. 
W. Brands said: "The cold war had resulted largely from the efforts of the U.S. to 
export capitalism across the globe. American leaders, concerned that a repetition of 
the depression of the 1930s would trigger the collapse of the American way of life, 
and convinced that preventing a repetition required opening foreign markets to 
American products, sallied forth to bring as much of the world as possible into the 
American economic sphere.'"" Barton J. Bernstein said there is evidence that 
"American policy was neither so innocent nor so nonideological....By over- 
extending policy and power and refusing to accept Soviet interests, American 
policy-makers contributed to the Cold War. ...There is evidence that Russian 
policies were reasonably cautious and conservative, and that there was at least a 
basis for accommodation." 1 ' 

One of the best documented books on the cause of the cold war is Harry S. 
Truman and the War Scare of 1948 by Frank Kofsky. Immediately after World War 
II, the corporate elite and many intellectuals were very concerned that a depression 
with mass unemployment would develop without an arms race. The trauma of the 
1930s was still fresh in the minds of many. 1 don't suggest that communism 
wasn't a serious threat. Godless communism was and is completely anathema to 
values we as a people hold dear, but it could have been confronted without the cold 
war and might have been, except that the bankers wanted to enhance their power, 
profits, and control over the people. 



126 Treason The New World Order 



The aircraft industry would have collapsed without large government procure- 
ment orders after the war. Business Week said: "The aircraft builders, even with tax 
carrybacks, are near disaster. ...Right now the government is their only possible 
savior — with orders, subsidies, or loans." 12 GE, Westinghouse, GM, the Du Pont 
family, Chase Bank, and the Rockefellers were heavily invested in the aircraft 
industry. They used their influence to promote the war scare and rearm America to 
protect their investments and increase profits. 

Truman's war scare was supported by press propaganda. After the war there 
was a massive campaign to promote capitalism to counteract the communist 
menace and damage the unions. In 1950, U.S. News & World Report said: 
"Government planners figure they have found the magic formula for almost end- 
less good times. ...Cold War is the catalyst. Cold War is an automatic pump- 
primer. Turn the spigot and the public clamors for more arms spending." Threats 
of war were good for business. 

According to Business Week, sharply increased military spending was a strong 
prop for business, there would be less unemployment, and increased war spending 
would limit the growth of welfare spending. While military spending doesn't alter 
the economy, growing "welfare and public-works spending," in contrast "does alter 
the economy." Welfare programs "create new institutions" and, even worse, they 
"redistribute income." " Better to spend the country into bankruptcy and have tens 
of thousands of Americans die in needless foreign wars than risk the people gain- 
ing more economic and political power. With an arms race and a permanent war 
economy, it was much easier to control the people and to further enrich the 
corporate elite. Self aggrandizement of the ruling class and ideological concerns 
replaced practical considerations of America's national interest. 

The reality was that, while Stalin and the Soviet Union were not easy to deal 
with, it was in the national interest of the East and West to maintain peace to re- 
cover from the devastation of the recent war. The actions of the Soviet Union after 
the war gave cause for alarm, but there were better ways to deal with that threat. It 
would have been possible to develop a policy of mutual tolerance without massive 
rearmament, but even the possibility of this was rejected. "Regardless of how 
outlandish or nonsensical most 'conspiracy theories' may be, the fact of the matter 
is that members of the ruling class and the power elite in the late 1940s showed 
themselves ready to resort to conspiratorial machinations whenever they deemed it 
necessary."" The ruling elite in America found it in their interests to create a 
permanent war economy and the cold war. 

In 1948 the historian Thomas Bailey wrote: "Because the masses are notori- 
ously shortsighted and generally cannot see danger until it is at their throats, our 
statesmen are forced to deceive them into an awareness of their long-run interests." 
Of course lying to the American people was hardly new. It was just that the stakes 
were higher, but then so were the profits. In 1978 Carl Bernstein interviewed 
Clark Clifford, who as a close aide, saw Truman every day. Clifford said: "The 
President didn't attach fundamental importance to the so-called Communist scare. 
He thought it was a lot of baloney. ...It was a political problem. We did not 
believe there was a real problem. A problem was being manufactured. There was a 
certain element of hysteria." 1 ' 

It is difficult for us now to look back and appreciate the climate of hysteria, 
fear, and panic that our government created. Washington created an impression that 
the Soviets were imminently going to start a war by invading Western Europe. 



Rise of the National Security State: The Cold War and Democracy 127 



There was a constant barrage of concern about the Soviet threat and the need to 
spend billions of dollars to stop the communist menace. Truman used deceit and 
manipulation with baseless claims of an imminent Soviet military threat. By 
deliberately misrepresenting Soviet intentions and using highly inflammatory lan- 
guage, the Truman administration manipulated Congress and the people creating 
an atmosphere of crisis. "We are compelled to conclude that, more often than not, 
there was no real connection between the military and foreign policy programs the 
Truman administration urged on Congress on the one hand and the dangers to 
which the administration claimed to be responding on the other. Instead, expedi- 
ency and improvisation ruled the day: the administration first decided what it 
wished to extract from Congress and the electorate, and then, as events during the 
spring of 1948 illustrate, reached for the nearest available pretexts to justify its 
demands." 16 

Not everyone accepted this analysis. In February, 1948 General Eisenhower in 
a speech before the National Press Club expressed strong doubts that the Soviet 
Union intended to start a global war with the West. "The Soviet Union is in no 
position to support a global war," he said." The Wall Street Journal in an editorial 
complained about this emotional and factless government policy. "Yet we have 
not been told precisely what this crisis is, what form of danger we are to prepare 
against. Nevertheless we are told, it is a tremendous crisis and Congress ought to 
do all the things the President asks without slopping to debate them. ...To get 
these programs approved Congress is bombarded with alarums and excursions 
....We have a right to expect more than that from our leaders."" 

The most difficult problem that Truman faced during the 1948 war scare was 
that the Soviets tried to improve relations. The Soviets desperately wanted to 
avoid serious conflict with the West, and they initiated aggressive actions as a 
defensive measure after being sharply rebuffed in their attempts at reconciliation. 
There is evidence suggesting that the Soviets blockaded Berlin to force the West 
into serious negotiations to avoid an arms race they could ill afford. On May 10 in 
a letter to the U.S. ambassador and on May 17 in a letter to Henry Wallace, Stalin 
attempted to negotiate with the U.S. At the very least you can negotiate with 
another state to see if there is any basis for improved relations. Instead Washing- 
ton promptly rejected these peace feelers referring to the dangerous Soviet threat. 
When Stalin died in 1953 the Soviets again put out feelers to improve relations. 
Although even Winston Churchill asked the U.S. to at least allempt to negotiate 
with the Soviets, our response was no. The cold war was too good for business. 

The U.S. was so bellicose towards the Soviet Union in the late 1940s partly 
because only the West had nuclear weapons, and it realized the Soviet Union had 
sustained so much damage in World War II that it had no interest in a prolonged 
fight with the West. Kofsky spent considerable time studying the archives of the 
Truman administration and found no evidence of a serious fear that the Soviets 
intended to attack the West. Instead evidence suggested that Stalin feared being in- 
vaded by the West. After World War II intelligence estimates of the Soviet Union 
almost universally supported the view that, while the Soviet Union was hostile 
towards the West and in the long term hostilities might be initiated, there was no 
immediate intent to start a war. This analysis did not change during the 1948 war 
scare. 

Little consideration has been given to the effect on the captured nations after 
the cold war began. The leaders of the U.S. military government in Germany, 



128 Treason The New World Order 



Lucius Clay and Robert Murphy, initially opposed German partition partly 
because of the effect it would have on the East Germans. While Soviet rule had 
been established, many noncommunist elements were allowed to remain in society 
and the real terror of the police state only began with the start of the Marshall 
Plan, as Melvyn P. Leffler in A Preponderance of Power: National Security, the 
Truman Administration and the Cold War noted. Stalin constantly ordered com- 
munist parties in the West to work within the system and not to initiate revolu- 
tionary actions. Except in Greece and Czechoslovakia this policy was followed. 

Even when a communist insurgency started in Greece in 1946, Soviet aid was 
non-existent and U.S. officials were well aware of this. Our Secretary of State 
acknowledged "the present Soviet and satellite attitude in withholding a firm 
commitment" to the Greek communists. In 1947 when the Soviet Union estab- 
lished a new international organization, the Communist Information Bureau, 
Greek delegates were kept out. And no communist nation ever recognized the 
communist government established in northern Greece. 

The Czechoslovakian communists were quite popular, partly because of the 
traditional relations and trade between Russia and Czechoslovakia and the great fear 
Czechoslovakia had of a resurgent Germany. The communists already controlled 
much of the government including the police, and it was obvious that there would 
be little serious internal opposition to a full take-over. Internal documents showed 
that the CIA at the time found no evidence that the Czechoslovakian takeover was 
part of a grand design to conquer all of Europe, as Truman proclaimed in support 
of rearmament. 

The National Security Act of 1947 was more fully implemented in 1950, 
with edict NSC-68 outlining the policies of the U.S. in the cold war. This doc- 
ument was declassified in 1975 during the post-Nixon attempt to clean up 
government. It demonstrates how we never really intended to negotiate with the 
Soviet Union. The objective was to greatly increase conventional forces and 
nuclear power, develop foreign alliances, sharply increase taxes, and mobilize the 
entire American society through fear and terror to stop communism. This radical 
new policy was never openly debated. Our original Constitution was secretly re- 
placed with the national security state, and few noticed. 

There was one other reason why the elite wanted to create the cold war. Except 
for a few years during World War I, the U.S. had followed George Washington's 
advice to avoid foreign political entanglements. George Washington said: "It is our 
true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances." Thomas Jefferson declared we 
should have "peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling 
alliances with none." A strong isolationist movement kept the U.S. out of the 
League of Nations, and most of the country was very isolationist during the 
1930s. The corporate elite feared that after the war the country would once again 
turn inward, so the cold war was needed to create a need for foreign political 
alliances. 

An active external threat kept Americans involved in world affairs. The State 
Department was very concerned that Americans would not persist in being 
interested in international relations. In September 1945 an aide warned Secretary 
Forrestal that Americans would not support a "complete realignment of govern- 
ment organizations. ..to serve our national security in the light of our new world 
power and position." Yet active participation in world affairs was crucial to 
support the long term goals of the corporate elite to destroy national sovereignty 



Rise of the National Security State: The Cold War and Democracy 129 



and through international trade and foreign alignments, to establish a one world 
government. 

Accompanying the new cold war was the signing of the NATO alliance in 
1949, which represented a sharp break with our past. Senator Robert Taft, a lead- 
ing politician in the late 1940s, recognized what a change it was for us to enter the 
NATO alliance. He criticized our being tied to the actions of 1 1 other nations. 
"The history of these obligations has been that once begun, they cannot easily be 
brought to an end. ...There is no limit to the burden of such a program or its 
dangerous implications." How right he was!" Taft said he was "More than a bit 
tired of having the Russian menace invoked as a reason for doing any — and 
every — thing that might or might not be desirable or necessary on its own 
merits." Ex-Secretary of State Dean Acheson said the government overcame rising 
isolationist sentiment to internationalism because the Korean War "came along 
and saved us." 

In 1950, in National Security and Individual Freedom, Harold Lasswell warned 
that continuing war may create "garrison states," political systems obsessed with 
national security, where perpetual war or the perceived threat of war leads to the 
concentration of all political power in the hands of an elite devoted to violence. 
Ultimately this condition leads to a totalitarian state. "Overzealousness in the 
cause of national defense weakens rather than strengthens total security. ...To the 
extent that intimidation is threatened or applied at home, we have a police state." 10 
"Here in truth, lay the supreme merit of the new Cold War gospel. It allowed 
America's leaders to wage unceasing war against the American people." 5 

To maintain our external involvement supposedly meant there was a strong 
need for stability in the U.S. which a strong security state would ensure. Liberties 
had to be sacrificed because of dangerous external menaces. Threats of a commu- 
nist menace served the purpose of our corporate masters. "It creates a climate of 
opinion and a political atmosphere that makes it easier to discredit and repress 
labor militancy and progressive and anti-capitalist viewpoints at home and 
abroad." 21 In 1953 I. F. Stone said: "The young were taught to distrust ideas which 
had been the gospel of the Founding Fathers." 

Repressive activities of the federal government continued throughout the cold 
war. Many artists were blacklisted, and background checks on federal employees, 
uniformed service personnel, and people in industries connected to national defense 
became the norm. By 1958, 9.8 million Americans had been investigated and 
millions had taken a loyalty oath. The easiest way to justify increased federal 
authority was by appealing to national security. 

In response to the cold war, our government was altered so the country would 
be protected against communism. Congress created a separate national security 
state within the executive branch of the federal government. This included the 
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and the 
National Security Council (NSC) There was no peacetime precedent for the powers 
conferred on these organizations. They had the power to classify and to determine 
who would be told what was being done, and they were authorized to function with 
little real oversight from the elected officials. The cold war allowed the president 
and executive branch to assume increased unilateral powers. The president had al- 
most unlimited power to define national security. 

Especially towards the end of his administration, Eisenhower became more 
concerned about the nuclear arms race. He realized that even he had no real knowl- 



130 Treason The New World Order 



edge of what was being done and it might not be possible to stop the wild growth 
of nuclear arms. Eisenhower was deeply shocked when he saw how the Pentagon 
planned to conduct a nuclear war. It is partly for this reason that he said at his 
farewell address, "Until the latest of our world conflicts, the U.S. had no arma- 
ments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required 
make swords as well. But now. ..we have been compelled to create a permanent 
armaments industry of vast proportions. This conjunction of an immense military 
establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. ...We 
must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or 
unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise 
of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this 
combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take noth- 
ing for granted." 

Over the years many respected commentators have warned how the cold war 
has negatively altered our form of government. Stewart Udall, former Secretary of 
Interior for JFK and congressman, said: "During President Truman's administr- 
ation, obsessions about national security altered the relationship of the American 
people to their government by constricting the openness that had been a hallmark 
of American democracy.... My experiences and observations told me that the cold 
warriors contempt for restraint had poisoned our politics. ...I was dismayed when, 
although the contest with Communism ended without violence, Cold War 
attitudes and values continued to dominate American policies and policy making." 
Udall concluded: "As I look back in the 1980s, it was painfully evident that 
...we... paid a heavy moral and political price by ignoring the open-government 
commands of our Constitution....We must dismantle the national security state we 
created to combat Communism and return to the constitutional principles and 
ethical values that animated our democracy's evolution. ...If our society is to regain 
the resilience and openness that once made our democracy a model for other 
countries, we must reaffirm our cherished political ideals and institutions...." 2 ' 

In 1973 Senator Fulbright said: "War and conditions of war are incompatible 
and inconsistent with our system of democracy. Our democratic system is bound 
to be eroded, and an authoritarian system is bound to take its place. We are in that 
process now...." Senator Mike Gravel said the cold war created a new culture in 
America "a national security culture, protected from the influences of American 
life by the shield of secrecy." 

According to Lewis Lapham, "Under the pretext of rescuing people from 
incalculable peril, the government over the last fifty years has claimed for itself 
enormously enhanced powers of repression and control. The obsession with 
security in all its forms. ..national, personal, and municipal — has shifted the 
balance of the American equation. ...Without the operatic stage set of the cold war, 
the American national security state was hard pressed to define its purpose, and the 
American people were beginning to understand how much money and poetic 
imagination had been invested in the making of the Communist menace."" 

Bill Moyers said: "I find it stunning, looking back, how easily the cold war 
enticed us into surrendering popular control of government to the national security 
state. ...For 40 years a secret government has been growing behind. ..stately 
tributes to American ideals, growing like a cancer on the Constitution. ...The 
secret government has no Constitution. The rules it follows are the rules it makes 
up. ...How does it happen that to be anti-communist we become undemocratic, as 



Rise of the National Security State: The Cold War and Democracy 131 



if we have to subvert our society in order to save it. In the name of national 
security much is kept secret and the president can do whatever he wants in secret to 
preserve national security while destroying our civil rights. ...Government was 
supposed to protect society against lawlessness; now it became a lawbreaker, 
violating the Constitution in effect, in order to save it. 

"The people who wrote this Constitution lived in a world more dangerous 
than ours. Yet they understood that even in perilous times, the strength of self- 
government was public debate and public consensus. ...They left us safeguards 
against men whose appetites for power might exceed their moral wisdom. To 
forget this — to ignore the safeguards, to put aside our basic values out of fear, to 
imitate the foe in order to defeat him — is to shred the distinction that makes us 
different.. ..An open society cannot survive a secret government. Constitutional 
democracy is no romantic notion. It's our defense against ourselves, the one foe 
who might defeat us. ...The principle of accountable power is now. ..repeatedly 
violated in the name of national security."" 

According to Gore Vidal: "The unloved American empire is now drifting into 
history on a sea of red ink. ...Thanks to money wasted in support of the national 
religion (corporate national security state), our quality of life is dire, and although 
our political institutions work smoothly for the few, the many hate them...." This 
is why politicians now run against the federal government although they continue 
to support it. During the years of the national security state "corporate America 
not only collected most of the federal revenue for 'defense' but, in the process," 
greatly reduced its share of federal taxes." 

William Greider asked: "How can the nation begin to restore a peaceable eco- 
nomic balance and evolve toward a society that is not so relentlessly organized 
around the machinery of war?.. ..After four decades in place, the national-security 
state is not going to go away any time soon. ...If nothing much changes, there 
will be a continuing political imperative to seek out new conflicts that justify the 
existence of the national-security state. The CIA, if it remains independent and 
secretive, will keep churning out its inflated assessments of new 'threats.'"" 

The cold war kept Americans united by fear, but now that the cold war is over 
the government still remains on a war footing. "The permanent mobilization has 
altered the democratic relationships profoundly, concentrating power in remote and 
unaccountable places, institutionalizing secrecy, fostering gross public deception 
and hypocrisy. It violated the law in ways that have become habitual. It assigned 
great questions of national purpose to a militarized policy elite. It centralized 
political power in the presidency at the expense of every other democratic insti- 
tution. The question is: Now that the enemy has vanished, is it possible that 
democratic order can be restored?" 1 " 

Along with the development of a vast national security establishment came an 
unchecked intelligence bureaucracy. The system of classifying thousands of docu- 
ments only really started during and after World War II. Before World War II there 
was never such widespread use of security with dozens of bureaucratic agencies 
classifying millions of documents. This unprecedented process is a dangerous 
abuse of power to control information and mislead the public. Truman issued Ex- 
ecutive Order (EO) 10290 extending the secrecy system to civilian departments on 
September 24, 1951. Congress never approved this classification system. While it 
is reasonable to keep some documents secret, few would accept the need to keep so 
many documents classified and for so many years. 



132 Treason The New World Order 



In a free society, real national security depends on an informed electorate. 
Secrecy in government represents a loss of democratic participation in govern- 
ment. Millions of people are disgusted with the political process partly because 
government has become one big secret. We can no longer openly and freely debate 
important issues. The key issues of our time are decided behind closed doors by a 
few people who often aren't even elected to office. Article I, Section 5 of the 
Constitution allows each House to keep certain items secret, but it was never the 
intent of the Founders to have secrecy become the norm in running the govern- 
ment. James Madison said: "A popular government without popular information 
or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps 
both." Excessive government secrecy shows how the government distrusts the 
people. 

David Wise in The Politics of Lying said: "The government has increasingly 
gained control over channels of information about military, diplomatic, and in- 
telligence events. Frequently the press and public, unable to check the events 
independently, can only await the appearance of the President on the television 
screen to announce the official version of reality. ...Because of official secrecy on a 
scale unprecedented in our history, the government's capacity to distort informa- 
tion in order to preserve its own political power is almost limitless."" Secrecy 
often covers up fraud, waste, and mismanagement. 

Secrecy and crisis enhanced executive power and increased the role of law 
enforcement agencies. Instead of Congress and the public having a say in policies, 
we are presented with completed events done because of the superior information 
the president has. Examples include the Vietnam War and the Bay of Pigs invasion 
of Cuba. Even many in the executive branch do not get important information to 
do their jobs because of the insane drive to keep documents secret. "Secrecy is one 
of the President's most important tools of power for it permits him to control 
information about crucial foreign policy decisions and events, and to filter the 
truth before it reaches Congress and the voters.'"" 

"The excuse for secrecy and deception most frequently given by those in 
power is that the American people must sometimes be misled in order to mislead 
the enemy. This justification is unacceptable on moral and philosophic grounds, 
and often it simply isn't true. ...The elitists who make national security policy 
...feel that they alone possess the necessary information and competence to deal 
with foreign policy crises and problems. Government deception, supported by a 
pervasive system of official secrecy and an enormous public relations machine, has 
reaped a harvest of massive public distrust." 11 

CBS Evening News on June 15, 1994 said in 1993 Congress finally discov- 
ered that it costs over $16 billion to keep documents secret, with about 32,400 
people employed. Congress couldn't find out the CIA costs because that was 
considered a secret The total annual bill in the same period to run the State and 
Justice Departments was 16.5 billion dollars. Even the Department of Education 
paid for secure phone lines. 

The present classification system is very influenced by President Reagan's EO 
12356 issued April 6,1982. It states that "Information may nol be classified under 
this Order unless its disclosure reasonably could be expected to cause damage to 
the national security," and that government agencies should err on the side of 
secrecy. The result has been that more officials have the authority to classify doc- 
uments and more documents are now classified. The organized declassification of 



Rise of the National Security State: The Cold War and Democracy 133 



documents started by President Eisenhower in 1953 stopped. History is a menace 
to national security. 

When the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was set up in 1966 the intent 
was to allow anyone to see any government document except for specific exemp- 
tions, like military secrets or sensitive financial data. It was supposed to take 10 
days to get a response for a FOIA request. Since the early 1980s the FOIA has 
been considerably weakened, and government agencies became quite resistant to 
FOIA requests after EO 12356 was signed. Documents already released under the 
FOIA could again be classified under EO 12356. When in doubt, classify a docu- 
ment or withhold it on any technicality. The will of Congress in passing the 
FOIA law was partially negated by this presidential edict which violates the 
Constitution. Also, a 1985 presidential directive ordered the transfer of government 
information to private industry. Then these companies charged whatever they 
wanted, which is one more technique used to keep information from the people. 

A 1986 amendment to the FOIA was supposed to case the costs involved in 
making an FOIA request, but instead that act has been used to force people to 
show that FOIA requests are in the public interest. It is now often necessary to sue 
the government to get information released through the FOIA, and documents are 
often withheld because of political embarrassment. Different agencies use different 
strategies to prevent the release of documents, and the entire process has become 
very capricious. It now often takes two years or more, to get information released 
under the FOIA, which makes it hard for reporters with a deadline. Some agencies 
respond quickly to FOIA requests, while it is very difficult to get documents from 
military and intelligence agencies. In 1990 the FBI closed 78 percent of the FOIA 
requests by saying the requests were flawed or the records requested weren't avail- 
able." 

Former U.S. ambassador to Germany Kenneth Rush held secret meetings with 
the Soviet Union in 1971. After retiring he gave his notes to the State Depart- 
ment. Later when he tried to get the notes back while writing his memoirs he was 
turned down because they were classified. A historian wrote a study on why a 
Pentagon project failed. The Pentagon later said the study was so secret that the 
author couldn't read it. At his Senate confirmation hearing future head of the CIA 
Woolsey was asked how the CIA could be less secretive. He said that he'd rather 
discuss that in a secret hearing. 

The courts usually support government attempts to make it harder to get 
documents from the FOIA." This is especially true with the Washington, D.C. 
Circuit Court of Appeals which reviews most FOIA cases. When national security 
is claimed to withhold documents, the courts usually agree with the government. 
The CIA won one case when it refused to release documents concerning the use of 
mind-control drugs on unwilling subjects. In Washington Post v. U.S. Depart- 
ment of Defense (1991) the court, citing national security concerns, withheld 
information based on "little more than a showing that the agency's (CIA) rationale 
is logical.'" 4 

In 1990 the Congressional Research Service concluded that by the year 2,000 
75 percent of all federal government transactions will be handled electronically. 
The Clinton Justice Department supported the Bush view that it wasn't necessary 
to preserve electronic records as is required with paper documents. Fortunately, on 
August 13, 1993 a court ruled against the federal government. Clinton also fought 
legal attempts to publish the records of secret meetings over health care under the 



134 Treason The New World Order 



Federal Advisory Committee Act. And the administration claims it has broad 
authority to keep records from being released under the FOIA by labeling records 
presidential instead of agency records. 

Today, even though the cold war is supposedly over, there are now more doc- 
uments then ever kept classified. Clinton pledged to have a more open policy, but 
the government was classifying more papers than under Bush. In April, 1993 
Clinton set up a task force to review ways to reduce excessive overclassification of 
documents with a new EO. Part of the problem is that the head of this task force, 
Steven Garfinkel, headed the Information Security Oversight Office for Reagan and 
Bush. Many key players in the national security state have been kept in place by 
Clinton. Garfinkel was quoted in several publications as staling that he feels most 
Americans don't care about excessive secrecy in government and that a new EO 
would "put a fresh coat of paint on" the order he would have given George Bush." 

On November 10, 1994 Clinton released EO 12937" which declassifies 43.9 
million pages of classified files including 22.9 million pages from after 1945. 
EOs have been proposed to automatically declassify documents after 25 years and 
to release much material obtained from satellite intelligence. People who want to 
study this field should read the Secrecy and Government Bulletin put out by the 
Federation of American Scientists." On April 17, 1995 Clinton released EO 
12958 which replaced EO 12356. This furthers the process of declassifying more 
government documents. 

While these EOs are an improvement, little will change as long as the 
Democratic/Republican party controls the government. EO 12937 only releases 
one percent of all classified cold war documents. A new system is needed so that 
far fewer documents get classified, and over the years most documents are auto- 
matically declassified. Congress should establish strict standards as to what can be 
classified, and when the executive bureaucracy tries to subvert the will of 
Congress, there should be strict civil and criminal fines. Congress should also es- 
tablish an agency with the authority to look at any government documents to see 
that its will is being fulfilled. 

Archibald MacLeish, the Librarian of Congress between 1939 to 1945 and 
former Assistant Secretary of State, understood how far we had diverged from the 
teachings of the Founding Fathers. The dignity of the individual with God given 
rights has been overwhelmed by a "faithless materialism." In the 201h century we 
have gone from being a free society that protects individual rights to having 
massive state intervention in our lives. In fighting communism we copied it, as 
the power of the state grew and the rights of the individual weakened. "By putting 
the hatred and fear of Russia first we opened the sacred center of our lives. ..the 
freedom of mind and thought — to those among us who have always hated those 
freedoms and who know well how to use our fear of Russia as a mask to cover 
their disguised attacks. The spread of legalized thought control. ..across the country 
is not the work of chance. It is the work of freedom-hating men....What has been 
happening to the people of the U.S. in the last few years is something that can 
destroy the inward vitality of the nation if we let it go on."" If we continue to 
separate ourselves from the teachings of the Founding Fathers, we as a people will 
be lost. MacLeish said that terms like revolution and freedom had developed new 
limited meanings. Today terms like militia and patriot are also vilified, although 
such people established our Republic. We must find the moral courage to restore 
the dignity of the individual by restoring constitutional government in America. 



Rise of the National Security State: The Cold War and Democracy 135 



We sacrificed the ideals of the Republic, human decency, and the rule of law 
in the war against communism. Many foreigners turned against America because 
we turned against the principles that led to the founding of this Republic. In the 
name of stopping communism, anything was acceptable. President Eisenhower 
said in 1954: "If the U.S. is to survive, long-standing American concepts of 'fair 
play' must be reconsidered." Cold war myths and misconceptions have warped our 
national ethos. In the process of winning the cold war, we lost our moral integrity 
as a nation." 

John Le Carre said: "The fight against Communism diminished us. ...It left us 
in a state of false and corrosive orthodoxy. It licensed our excesses and we didn't 
like ourselves the better for them. It dulled our love of dissent and our sense of 
life's adventures." According to Felix Morley, former editor of the Washington 
Post, "The underlying issue for Americans is whether we shall continue the con- 
trolled central government that was designed, or slip unconsciously into one of the 
forms of dictatorship encouraged by the profound upheavals of two world wars." 40 

An edited book, National Security and the U.S. Constitution, constantly 
attacked the problems of maintaining national security in a democracy. Some of 
the authors said national security can be better maintained without a democracy. It 
is difficult reaching a consensus, especially when speed is essential with so many 
participants in national policies. "The US. constitutional system so constrains 
the executive that the nation is now unable to respond to international threats and 
challenges. ...Covert action and democratic accountability are incompatible. ...The 
pluralism of the American political process has impeded rationalized intelligence 
organization."* 1 Patrick Kennon, a CIA agent for many years, said "The police 
state became the ideal if not the norm" as more complex societies develop. 
Kennon sees a "credible threat of force" as necessary for the modern nation state." 

Both the U.S. and the Soviet Union lost the cold war. Along with the loss of 
civil rights, the economics of each nation were seriously damaged. The arms race 
increased the national debt and weakened most social service programs. While we 
fought the cold war, our allies modernized their economics to their competitive 
advantage. The military budget provided important benefits for scientific research 
and development which created many jobs, but military priorities have weakened 
our economic development, with the cold war economy actually displacing more 
jobs than it created. Much of the national debt is from the defense spending in the 
1980s." If our defense budget was cut to around $150 billion it would still be 
larger than what Western Europe and Japan spend on defense." Paul Kennedy, in 
The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, demonstrated that typically nations become 
leading states through war and then decline when they become overextended. 

More money should be spent on conversion of industry from military to 
nonmilitary production. Most jobs in the defense industry could be preserved if 
there was a major shift to environmental protection and clean-up and a major 
investment in renewable energy development. Such a move would also provide 
ample opportunities for research and development companies, while the jobs creat- 
ed in these new industries would generally be higher paying skilled labor. New 
jobs in solar energy, fuel cells, electric cars, and high energy appliances would 
employ many people in high paying jobs. Such an approach would also lessen 
industry concerns that environmental issues are hurting jobs and business growth 
while greatly improving our quality of life. The benefits of such a policy are 
obvious, but it won't happen while the Democrats and Republicans control 



136 Treason The New World Order 



Congress and the White House. The invisible government will not allow the 
security state to be dismantled. And "the political and economic elite will support 
deficits that finance the military and enrich the wealthy, but not deficits that 
support social spending, full employment and downward income distribution."" 

Many large defense contractors are not interested in conversion to nonmilitary 
production and research. They feel that new threats will develop that will expand 
military procurement. While Clinton as a candidate spoke glowingly of cutting the 
defense budget after he was in office there were limited cuts and recently the 
defense budget has grown." We should restore the rights protected in the Constit- 
ution and also rebuild our infrastructure and improve Americas competitive 
position in world markets. Our national security has been threatened by our weak- 
ened economic position, which developed partly because the government con- 
centrated on security and defense issues. 

One of the best kept secrets of the 20th century is that World War II is over. 
We should today declare World War II and the cold war over, close our overseas 
military bases, and bring the troops home. There is no longer any serious military 
threat to Europe, and it is completely unnatural for the U.S. to remain the dom- 
inant European military power. Not only does having thousands of our troops 
overseas weaken America's economy, but leaving thousands of American troops 
overseas will ultimately turn our allies against us. Many times while in Europe, I 
watched the controlled anger of Germans looking at American troops in German 
restaurants and gas stations. If large numbers of foreign troops were stationed in 
America for 50 years there would be deep resentment. American troops remain 
overseas today because our power hungry leaders refuse to end the national security 
state not because of any vital American interest. The overemphasis on national 
security has been counterproductive on all levels. We must not allow the secret 
government to use propaganda to create numerous new enemies to justify the 
continued existence of the national security state. 



137 



Chapter XI 

The CIA and the 
Intelligence Community 



"The principles of a free Constitution are irrevocably lost when the legislative 
power is dominated by the executive." 

Edward Gibbon 

"During the Bolshevik revolution in Russia, Lenin created the Cheka (later the 
KGB), a secret organization. ..filled with zealots who terrorized opponents. They 
made up their own rules, they chose their own missions, and they judged their 
own operations. You say it can't happen here? Well, before deciding for sure, let's 
look at the history of our secret government." 

Bill Moyers 



In August, 1994 there was a brief uproar in Congress because it was discov- 
ered that the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), which runs the spy satellites 
was building a huge new headquarters in Virginia. The cost was going to be $350 
million. To hide the true purpose of the building, millions of dollars in taxes were 
paid by the construction company, although the federal government would not 
normally pay such taxes. People in Congress were upset because they weren't in- 
formed of this project as is required. 1 When the oversight committees in Congress 
cannot even keep track of such a massive building just outside Washington, D.C., 
it is obvious that the intelligence community is involved in many activities that 
the American public and its representatives have no idea about. During this uproar 
one representative on the oversight committee said that, while they don't learn 
about various internal activities of the CIA, they are supposed to approve building 
projects. What about everything else? 

Clinton agreed to an open congressional hearing on the NRO building project 
according to his press secretary because "the American public deserves a full ac- 
counting of how their tax dollars are being spent." Yet during the hearing the 
NRO head refused to answer questions about the agency such as the number of 
buildings it owns and the related costs. It was also revealed that the building was 
deliberately hidden from the oversight committees, but this was just called negli- 
gence. The incident shows the contempt the intelligence community has for 
Congress. 

There was also a rare admission that information on this building was consid- 
ered above top secret. One of the first public discussions that there were various 
security classifications above top secret was in The Politics of Lying, by David 
Wise in 1973. Senator Gore and most or perhaps all of Congress were not even 
aware of these higher classifications. Information that is above top secret will 
rarely be discussed in Congress, because it includes secret plans to remove the 



138 Treason The New World Order 



Constitution and establish a dictatorship. There is also the ongoing surveillance of 
Americans which is why the NRO is so secret. It uses advanced technology, much 
of which has never been discussed, to spy on thousands of Americans. 

According to news reports President Clinton also wasn't aware of this build- 
ing project and this may well be true. There are about 10 classifications of security 
above top secret and Clinton, only being the president, has a very low security 
clearance barely above top secret, so he is not allowed access to most security 
matters. It is partly for this reason that newspapers have stated that Clinton usu- 
ally leaves security matters to others. I wrote to the House and Senate committees 
that have oversight for the intelligence community and asked who had access to 
information above top secret. One committee refused to answer and the other just 
sent a list of their members. Perhaps no one in Congress has security clearance to 
access information above top secret. If this is so, how can Congress fulfill its 
constitutional mandate to provide funds and keep track of such spending? 

On September 29, 1994 the ABC News show, Primetime Live, suggested 
that the NRO was completely beyond the control of Congress. The NRO had 
recently signed a $10 billion contract even though Congress had ordered it to not 
do that without first receiving congressional approval which had not been given. 
Congress, weeks later, accidently learned that this contract had been signed. 
Congress doesn't understand that it is increasingly irrelevant to the national secu- 
rity state. In the 1970s Senator Church warned about the ability of the National 
Security Agency (NSA) to monitor all forms of communication and if this isn't 
stopped "There would be no place to hide. If this government ever becomes a 
tyranny, if a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity 
that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to im- 
pose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back. ...I know the capacity 
that is there to make tyranny total in America and we must see to it that (the 
intelligence agencies) that possess this technology operate within the law and 
under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss 
from which there is no return." 

In July, 1994 $30 billion was voted for the intelligence community. In July, 
1994 an attempt to declassify the full intelligence budget was defeated in the 
House, and Clinton claimed it would damage national security. Tim Weiner in 
Blank Check "found hundreds of programs camouflaged under code names, their 
costs deleted, their totals disguised. Code words and blank spaces stood where facts 
and figures should have been."' On September 24, 1995 the Washington Post said 
the NRO had secretly hoarded over $1 billion without telling the CIA, Pentagon, 
or Congress. Then in late January, 1996 the New York Times said the total "lost" 
by the NRO was over $2 billion." Next, on May 16, 1996 the New York Times 
said the total money "lost" was $4 billion and there was "a complete collapse of 
accountability" by the NRO. 

Under the Constitution Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7, only Congress can 
appropriate funds and there shall be a regular accounting of how funds are spent. 
James Madison said: "This power over the purse" is "the most complete and effec- 
tual weapon with which any Constitution can arm the immediate representatives 
of the people." 4 Thomas Jefferson said controlling the purse was "one effectual 
check to the dog of war by transferring the power of letting him loose. ..from those 
who are to spend to those who have to pay." The Founders rejected secrecy in 
government and felt the people should have full knowledge of what the govern- 



The CIA and the Intelligence Community 139 



ment was doing to keep government honest, open, and accountable to the people. 
Patrick Henry said a free people must never "allow the national wealth. ..to be 
disposed of under the veil of secrecy." James Madison also said: "Knowledge will 
forever govern ignorance. And a people who mean to be their own Governors, 
must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.'" 

Government agencies must submit their budgets at regular intervals to 
Congress for review. Yet the CIA and most of the intelligence community vio- 
lates this constitutional requirement especially with the secret or black budget. 
Weiner found that most members of Congress including members of the House 
Armed Services Committee had never even heard of the black budget. With a black 
budget money flows in from various sources with no one to check on what is 
happening. The black budget funds programs the president, head of the CIA, and 
the Secretary of Defense want kept hidden from the public. Many of these 
programs are also kept secret from the president, with the secret government in 
charge. 

In April, 1976 the Church Committee said the black budget was unconstitu- 
tional. "The budget procedures which presently govern the CIA and other agencies 
of the Intelligence Community prevent most members of Congress from knowing 
how much money is spent by any of these agencies or even how much money is 
spent on intelligence as a whole.... The failure to provide this information to the 
public and to the Congress prevents either from effectively ordering priorities and 
violates Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the Constitution...." A few months 
earlier Senator Church said: "If we are to preserve freedom and keep constitutional 
government alive in America, it cannot be left to a President and his agents alone 
to decide what must be kept secret. ...Congress cannot now in secret matters exer- 
cise its constitutional responsibilities in an orderly way." 

"The black budget is a creature of the cold war. The policy of secret spending 
began as an emergency measure at the dawn of the postwar world. It was conceived 
as a shield to conceal the secret wars of the CIA. ...Soviet secrecy fed American 
fears. Lacking facts, the U.S. assumed the worst. ...Fear begat funds. ...The obses- 
sion with secret operations spread throughout the great machinery of the American 
presidency. Soon the CIA and its sister agencies were reading Americans' mail, 
poring over their telegrams and tax returns, tapping their telephones, infiltrating 
church groups and college organizations, penetrating the press and manipulating 
the news. ...The secret forces created to fight communism abroad evolved into a 
power that threatened constitutional government at home." 6 

The part of the secret government that involves the intelligence community 
really began with the Manhattan Project, the secret program to build an atomic 
bomb. Until World War II the focus of American intelligence was to gather useful 
information not to conduct covert operations to change foreign governments. 
However, the Office of Strategic Services, led by General William Donovan, 
shifted to not only gathering intelligence but also to changing events. In 1944 
Donovan sent a proposal to President Roosevelt to establish a permanent intell- 
igence agency after the war. The plan was leaked to a reporter for the Chicago 
Tribune who called it a "super-gestapo agency" while some in Congress compared 
it to the Soviet secret police. 

When the CIA was established in 1947 many felt it would be dangerous be- 
cause it was unaccountable. A few conservatives said the CIA, with its secret 
budget and cloaked activities, would give the chief executive loo much new power 



140 Treason The New World Order 



to conduct foreign affairs, including wars, in secret without there even first being 
an open debate, approval, and appropriation. The very purpose of the CIA was to 
get around the democratic processes, empowering the president in the process. 
Secretary of State Dean Acheson had "the gravest forebodings" about the CIA 
warning that once it was established neither the president "nor anyone else would 
be in a position to know what it was doing or to control it." 

Despite the objection of a few people between 1947 and 1974 there was an 
attitude of benign neglect because of a cold war consensus that people in the CIA 
were men of honor who would do what was required to protect the nation against 
communism. The power of the security state increased partly because, although a 
few people in Congress were supposed to keep track of the intelligence agencies, 
this never occurred. From the earliest days, the intelligence community was out of 
control with no real congressional oversight. 

In the mid-1950s oversight committees under the Armed Services and Appro- 
priations Committees were established to bring more structure to congressional 
oversight of the intelligence community. However, there was only occasional 
oversight by senior members of Congress, like Senator Richard Russell and Rep. 
Carl Vinson. Most in Congress found this sufficient, believing that the executive 
branch should be in charge. In 1954 Senator Mike Mansfield warned that "Secrecy 
now beclouds everything about the CIA — its cost, its efficiency, its successes, and 
its failure. ...Once secrecy becomes sacrosanct, it invites abuse." But this was a 
lone voice. During this period the CIA provided little information to Congress, 
and often years went by with the congressional subcommittees on intelligence 
never meeting. 

Former Rep. Stewart Udall said in the 1950s his mentor was Senator Carl 
Hayden, chairman of the Appropriations Committee. For years Hayden was an 
important watch dog of the intelligence agencies. One morning after a courier 
dropped off a CIA summary, the senator told Udall that he didn't follow what the 
CIA was doing because then he would also be responsible. Udall later said: "It was 
obvious that republican self-government was losing out as citizens and their 
elected representatives were kept in the dark concerning crucial facts. How could 
any democracy properly function.. .If a 'cleared' elite was given power to frame the 
action options, and members of Congress were not allowed to debate policy op- 
tions or to participate in the making of decisions that affected the nation's 
security?'" 

Senator Allen Ellender, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Subcommittee of 
the Senate Appropriations Committee, also said he didn't want to know what the 
CIA was doing. In 1955 Senator Leverett Saltonstall, an influential member of the 
Armed Services Committee, said: "It is a question of our reluctance. ..to seek in- 
formation and knowledge on subjects which I personally. ..would rather not have." 
In 1954 Lt. General James Doolittle headed a commission to justify the ongoing 
intelligence activities. He said: "Hitherto acceptable norms of human conduct do 
not apply. If the U.S. is to survive, long-standing American concepts of 'fair play' 
must be reconsidered." The dirty business of spying was kept secret, with the ex- 
ecutive branch providing cover in the name of national security, however criminal 
or unconstitutional the conduct. 

President Kennedy said, after the Bay of Pigs disaster, that he planned to 
shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds. In 1963 Truman 
attacked the CIA as a danger to democracy. "Those fellows in the CIA don't just 



The CIA and the Intelligence Community 141 



report on wars and the like, they go out and make their own, and there's nobody to 
keep track of what they're up to. They spend billions of dollars on stirring up 
trouble so they'll have something to report on. ...It's become a government all of 
its own and all secret. They don't have to account to anybody. That's a very dan- 
gerous thing in a democratic society, and it's got to be put a stop to."* Senator 
Symington, while on the Committee for CIA Oversight, said "There is no federal 
agency of our government whose activities receive less scrutiny and control than 
the CIA." 

In the winter of 1970-1971 the press published stories that the CIA had 
formed an army of 36,000 in Laos to fight communism. No one in Congress was 
aware of this, although a few members were aware of a Laos operation. Congress 
learned that the CIA was spending large sums of money buried in the Pentagon's 
inventory of weapons. The National Security Act of 1947 did not grant the CIA 
power to conduct secret wars, and there is no evidence that Congress intended to 
grant such power to the CIA. However, in the spring of 1948 a presidential edict 
secretly established a covert action section in the CIA with the president secretly 
in charge of these activities. The CIA Act of 1949 was approved by Congress but 
no one understood what was being approved because it involved secrets that 
Congress could not be told. This law allowed the Office of Management and 
Budget to freely transfer funds from any agency to the CIA without regard to any 
laws limiting or prohibiting transfers between appropriations. The CIA did not 
have to explain how the money was being used. 

The CIA has always been more interested in covert operations including 
foreign wars, assassinations, and overthrowing foreign governments, than in tradi- 
tional intelligence gathering and analysis. This is a key reason why it has often 
failed to provide accurate intelligence. The CIA has engaged in hundreds of covert 
operations, like overthrowing the Salvador Allende Marxist government in Chile. 
Few in Congress had any knowledge of these operations. Covert operations caused 
sharp disagreements between Congress and the executive branch, and they have 
been conducted because of a loose interpretation of existing laws and secret presi- 
dential edicts. Congress sometimes gave partial approval by secretly funding these 
operations, often not even realizing what it was funding. The Intelligence 
Oversight Act of 1980 required the CIA to keep Congress informed of covert 
operations, but this act gave covert operations a degree of legitimacy for the first 
time by permitting them, in special circumstances, with no Congress consent 
being required.' 

Our foreign policy has increasingly become a military policy. The National 
Security Council (NSC) was established in 1947 to be a civilian advisory group to 
the president, but it "has become a command post for covert operations run by the 
military. Far removed from public view and congressional oversight, they are 
accountable only to the one man they serve. The framers of the Constitution feared 
this permanent state of war, with the commander in chief served by an elite private 
corps that put the claims of the sovereign (president) above the Constitution."" 1 

With the establishment of the Church and Pike Committees in the 1970s, the 
period of benign neglect of what the CIA was doing ended and Congress tried to 
control the CIA. During this period it was discovered that the CIA had a Domestic 
Operations Division which spied on Americans. This was illegal under the CIA's 
charter. Operation CHAOS kept tabs on thousands of Americans for over 15 years, 
especially Vietnam War protesters. The CIA shared information with other law 



142 Treason The New World Order 



enforcement groups on 300,000 Americans and had files on over 1,000 U.S. 
groups." Supposedly, the object of spying on Americans is to control people in 
the name of freedom. Yet in the process of saving the country, you destroy the 
democratic fabric of the nation. 

Senator Church called the CIA "a rogue elephant on a rampage." The Church 
Committee found that over "$10 billion was being spent by a handful of people, 
with little independent supervision, with inadequate controls, even less auditing, 
and an overabundance of secrecy." The GAO was not allowed proper access to 
study the books of the CIA, yet private accounting firms were allowed to audit its 
books. The CIA also secretly infiltrated its personnel into various areas of the ex- 
ecutive branch. It was found that covert actions "are irregularly approved, sloppily 
implemented, and at times have been forced on a reluctant CIA by the President 
and his National Security Advisor.'" 2 

When the Church Committee asked James Jesus Angleton, a senior CIA 
official, why he disobeyed a direct order from the White House to destroy the CIAs 
stockpile of poisons he responded: "It is inconceivable that a secret arm of the 
government has to comply with all the overt orders of the government." When 
leaders of the CIA refuse to follow orders from Congress or the executive branch, 
whose orders are they following? The CIA has for years been a law unto itself 
doing what the secret government wants. This is an extremely dangerous situation 
for any country. 

After the late 1970s false records were again used to fool Congress and once 
again Congress ignored the CIA. When Reagan appointed Casey head of the CIA, 
covert operations and the black budget greatly increased." In 1984 it was revealed 
that the CIA had mined Nicaragua's harbor without first telling Congress as re- 
quired. When an American and Chilean were killed by a car bomb in Washington, 
DC in 1986, Bush pressured the Justice Department to not investigate thoroughly 
because of national security concerns. CIA operatives worked with Chilean agents 
in this plot. That an American citizen was killed in the nation's capital didn't 
matter. 

During the Iran contra affair, a CIA station chief Joseph Fernandez faced four 
counts of perjury and obstruction of justice, but the Justice Department brought 
no charges. Special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh said national security could be 
used to cover-up the crimes of intelligence officers, making them a special class 
above the law. Senator Kerry said: "They were willing to literally put the Consti- 
tution at risk because they believed somehow there was a higher order of things. 
That's the most Marxist, totalitarian doctrine I've ever hear of in my life.... You've 
done the very thing that James Madison and others feared the most when they were 
struggling to put the Constitution together, which was to create an accountable 
system which didn't have runaway power, which didn't concentrate power in one 
hand so that you could have one person making a decision and running off against 
the will of the American people." 

The intelligence community has infiltrated all walks of life in America. The 
fight to publish The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence exemplifies how the CIA 
uses pressure and threats to keep newspapers and book publishers from releasing 
negative information about it. The CIA has gotten professors to manipulate 
student groups and to build files on students who may be targeted for future 
activities. It has paid professors and journalists to write over 1,200 books." The 
Church Committee couldn't force the CIA to reveal the names of these people. In 



The CIA and the Intelligence Community 143 



1980 when Harvard passed an internal regulation requiring professors to report any 
relationships with the CIA, the CIA sued Harvard and won claiming its First 
Amendment rights were being violated. The Intelligence Authorization Act for 
1992 contained the National Security Education Act with the goal of using the 
higher education system to train and recruit intelligence agents especially with 
foreign language and area training skills. CIA recruiters remain quite active on 
many college campuses. 

The intelligence community has also long had a close relationship with the 
banking and financial communities and their federal regulators. The CIA can usu- 
ally violate banking regulations with little or no consequence. There is a constant 
pattern of intelligence operatives using national security claims to avoid public 
scrutiny and criminal prosecution. The courts usually allow this sham. In 1988 
Robert Maxwell sued the First National Bank of Maryland and later agents of the 
CIA, FBI, and Justice Department. This Baltimore banker in 1986 told Treasury 
Department officials that the bank had violated the law by laundering money. 
Maxwell was forced to quit as manager of international letters of credit when he 
questioned the legality of transactions for an account, Associated Traders Corpora- 
tion, which he claimed was a CIA front for illegal operations. 

Maxwell has been unable to get another job in banking and he suffered a 
mental breakdown. The CIA threatened to have his lawyer disbarred and to have 
Maxwell indicted for releasing classified information, and it filed a motion asking 
that the information not be released because of national security. Naturally, the 
court agreed. National security should mean the protection of a citizens' rights, but 
this ruling meant that Maxwell lost his chance for justice. This ruling also ex- 
tended government secrecy to private businesses, which would give immunity to 
CIA's contractors." 

U.S. intelligence agencies used BCCI extensively for covert operations. 1 " 
According to Newsweek there is even evidence that the CIA helped establish 
BCCI. The key players in establishing this bank were all connected with U.S. 
intelligence." The CIA worked very closely with BCCI and had accounts in the 
bank throughout the world. The secret arms deal with Iran, which violated the 
Arms Export Control Act, was financed by BCCI, and there is evidence that BCCI 
helped transfer Saudi money to the Contras." During the BCCI investigation, 
people close to the intelligence community advised the bank on how to mislead 
congressional investigators. 

That the CIA is a law unto itself was also demonstrated in the S&L scandal. 
Pete Brewton, in The Mafia CIA and George Bush, described how this fiasco was a 
scam operation carried out by the bankers, big business, mafia, and the CIA often 
under the protection of certain Washington politicians. Loose alliances were 
formed by these groups to raid the same banks. Sometimes they worked together 
and sometimes they were just aware of each other's activities. The taxpayer was 
left with the bill. There were instances, during an FBI investigation, when the 
CIA said the person was working for the CIA so he was released. "The S&L 
crimes and debacles illustrate the servile quality of Presidents and Congresses, who 
view themselves primarily as agents of business, serving up a costly feast of cor- 
porate socialism for which powerless taxpayers get the check."" 

Crucial bank documents such as loan records, title company disbursement 
sheets, and federal and state examination reports were not available to reporters, 
but Congress had the authority to obtain and make these documents public. This 



144 Treason The New World Order 



was never done. Few people in Congress, the FBI, or the Justice Department ever 
asked where the money went and what could be done to get it back, because this 
was an inside job with many allies of Congress and the bureaucracy involved in 
the theft. The public can pay for all the losses, but we have no right to see where 
the money went! Colleagues involved in the S&L scam were let off easily by the 
rest of Congress. 

"In fact, the Justice Department itself has become a major layer of protection 
for the main beneficiaries of the savings-and-loan crisis." 2 " Yet the Justice 
Department managed to trace some of the Medellin Cartel's drug money in more 
difficult circumstances. The organized strike force that conducted successful S&L 
prosecutions in several states was closed during the S&L crisis. This was an inside 
operation and the government didn't want to arrest its own supporters. Instead law 
firms were hired to track the money, but they accomplished almost nothing be- 
cause they were generally allied with the Washington politicians and the people 
they were supposedly investigating. During the 1988 elections the S&L scandal 
was kept out of the news and it only broke months later. Congress, the Justice 
Department, and the press focused on flamboyant crooks in the S&L industry, 
while the main recipients of the money escaped untouched. Poor business judg- 
ment was used as an excuse, but this was rarely the case. 

In one $200 million transaction involving 21,000 acres in Florida, the 
borrowed money went to St Joe, a paper company owned by the Du Pont empire. 
This was learned because of a dedicated federal regulator Kenneth Cureton, but 
when he tried to obtain records of the bank on the Isle of Jersey, England where 
the money went, the Department of Justice's International Division, which 
approves subpoenas to offshore banks, blocked him. Several banks lost huge sums 
of money in this transaction." 

In February, 1990 Rep. Frank Annunzio ask CIA Director William Webster 
to appear before his Financial Institutions Subcommittee, just after the Houston 
Post reported alleged CIA involvement in the S&L scandal. Webster refused say- 
ing he should instead appear before the intelligence committee. Webster lied, say- 
ing that CIA officials were in touch with the Assistant U.S. Attorney in Houston 
mentioned in the article. As usual the House Intelligence Committee refused to 
conduct a full investigation. It made no real attempt to track the money or explore 
allegations of CIA and mafia collusion. The Houston Post article named six CIA 
people tied to financial institutions and the CIA admitted to Congress that it had a 
relationship with five people connected to failed S&Ls and it had done business 
with four banks that failed. There are also indications that failed S&L money went 
to operations controlled by the CIA, such as the Iran-contra affair. The CIA said 
this was classified information, and the committee refused to pursue the matter 
further. 

The director of the intelligence committee's staff was Dan Childs, a 26 year 
veteran of the CIA. Placing such people at the disposal of key congressional over- 
sight committees is one way the CIA effectively makes such oversight ineffective. 
In January, 1991, just after the House Intelligence Committee released its 
CIA/S&L report, Childs went back to work for the CIA. 

Part of the reason this fraud succeeded and little money was ever returned was 
because the press refused to do its job. While several good books were written, few 
newspapers tried to discover where the money went and fewer explored the CIA and 
mafia involvement in the scam that Pete Brewton and later Stephen Pizzo, in 



The CIA and the Intelligence Community 145 



Inside Job The Looting of America's Savings and Loans, had discussed. Pizzo also 
asked if some of the stolen billions had gone into illegal covert operations." In 
1995 Rep. Spencer Bachus, head of a committee studying government efforts to 
recover $2 billion stolen from a Texas S&L, said the Treasury Department repeat- 
edly refused to cooperate and provide records for their investigation. 

"All government bureaucracies perpetuate a certain exclusivity. But shrouded 
in secrecy, the CIA — like other spy agencies — is culturally more insular than 
most agencies. ...In the CIA the natural bureaucratic impulse to protect the 
institution is compounded by the bond of secrecy. And a culture is spawned that 
shields the agency from FBI investigations, congressional busybodies, and 
citizens...."" William Colby, former head of the CIA, said many employees of 
the CIA separated themselves from involvement in normal activities and became 
exclusively involved in intelligence activities. This created a distorted outlook on 
life. There developed "an inbred distorted elitist view of intelligence that held it to 
be above the normal processes of society with its own rationale and justification, 
beyond the restraints of the Constitution, which applied to everything and every- 
one else." 

To the CIA Congress is the enemy, and when investigated, the CIA's usual 
response is to lie or deceive with disinformation. This is why Congress has never 
understood what the CIA was doing. Ralph McGehee, a former CIA agent, said, in 
Deadly Deceits, in 25 years he had never seen the CIA tell Congress the truth. The 
only thing guaranteed is that the CIA will lie, and no one in Congress will do 
anything. The CIA encourages perjury before Congress, such as when the Church 
Committee investigated the CIA's involvement in Allende's removal as president 
of Chile." In November, 1980 John Gentry, a CIA analyst resigned, charging that 
the agency had lied to support executive branch policies. Later the CIA lied several 
times before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence about when it had 
stopped transferring intelligence information to Iraq. 25 

When Congress questions the intelligence community about suspicious act- 
ivities, intelligence agents often refuse to release information. During the BCCI 
investigation, the CIA refused to discuss the activities of Abdul-Raouf Khalil, 
Saudi Arabia's liaison to the CIA. The State Department even refused to help 
locate this person to serve legal papers, until regulators learned he often visited the 
CIA station chief in Saudia Arabia. The manager of the BCCI branch in Panama 
testified that the bank laundered drug profits for Noriega. When Senator Kerry 
requested records on Noriega the CIA, NSC, and other intelligence agencies refused 
to comply. Several people admitted that the Federal Reserve destroyed files reveal- 
ing the relationship between BCCI and the CIA and NSC. 

John Stockwell, a former CIA field agent in Angola in the late 1970s, headed 
the CIA's Angola desk in Washington. In The Praetorian Guard, he described how 
a lawyer entered his office and purged his files of incriminating evidence of illegal 
CIA activities in Angola. George Bush, then head of the CIA, who had previous 
testified that no illegal activities had taken place in Angola, returned to Congress 
and reaffirmed that he could find no files involving CIA misconduct in Angola. 
Congress dropped its investigation. 2 " After Stockwell resigned from the CIA in 
1977, he provided five days of detailed testimony to a closed congressional com- 
mittee about illegal CIA activities in Angola. Congress listened and did nothing. 
With Watergate so recent, Congress didn't have the stomach for another big 
scandal, so the problem of an out-of-control intelligence agency got worse. 



146 Treason The New World Order 



Early in 1995 the House Intelligence Committee threatened to subpoena a 
former top CIA official after he refused to discuss the agency's attempts to hide the 
loss of Soviet-bloc agents in recent years. According to the Washington Post, this 
committee found evidence that there was "a plan to restrict telling Congress about 
what was going on" so the CIA could "keep it under wraps." 

In March, 1995 there was another uproar when Rep. Robert Torricelli revealed 
that one or more Americans, including Michale DeVine, had been killed by CIA 
informants in Guatemala. Torricelli received information from Clinton officials 
angry with the CIA actions. This link was covered up for some time by the CIA, 
which upset many people. The CIA reportedly paid $44,000 to Guatemalan 
Colonel Alpirez after learning that he had killed DeVine. According to former 
DEA agent Celerino Castillo, DeVine was killed because he learned of Guatemalan 
military drug trafficking." Rep. Torricelli even received a report allegedly from 
someone in the NSA that internal documents were being destroyed to remove 
evidence. The FBI conducted an investigation but naturally found nothing. 

Since 1976 twenty U.S. citizens have been attacked or killed in Guatemala. 
We may never know how many of them were attacked by CIA informants. Rep. 
Torricelli is to be congratulated for speaking up. Newt Gingrich attacked Torricelli 
saying he violated his oath of secrecy as a member of the House Intelligence 
Committee. However, the information Torricelli released was not received during 
any Intelligence Committee meetings, and Toricelli said "Under circumstances 
where the issue is criminal conduct, I believe that oath is in direct conflict with 
the oath that every member takes to adhere to the Constitution and the laws of the 
U.S." When one learns of a criminal act, one must speak up or become an accom- 
plice to that crime. People should ask Gingrich how many Americans have to be 
murdered before it is acceptable to criticize the CIA for its criminal activities. 
Gingrich and his crowd will do anything to protect the secret government." 

On December 3, 1995 CBS's 60 Minutes interviewed Toto Constant. For 
several years, while a paid CIA informant and senior Haitian official, he actively 
worked to defeat U.S. policy towards Haiti. On October 3, 1993 Constant led a 
protest demonstration against the landing of 400 U.S. and Canadian troops in 
Haiti. Then at a White House meeting the CIA said there would be considerable 
violence if the troops landed, although others disputed this. During this period the 
CIA leaked information to Congress challenging Aristide's mental stability, when 
Clinton wanted to restore Aristide to power in Haiti. The U.S. government has its 
policies, but so does the CIA. When there is a conflict, the CIA will sometimes 
disrupt administration policies. In this instance the CIA was probably protecting 
its drug supply lines through Haiti. The only thing unusual about this case was 
that part of the CIA's disinformation efforts surfaced. 

In recent years seven or more CIA station chiefs have been removed from their 
posts because of illegal or unsavory activities. A station chief in Cyprus stole at 
least one valuable religious icon from a church. Instead of being arrested, these of- 
ficials were transferred and then sometimes allowed to resign. The arrest of Richard 
Ames for spying is not the only instance of an intelligence agent gone bad. 

According to Ames, "the espionage business as carried out by the CIA and a 
few other American agencies, was and is a self-serving sham, carried out by ca- 
reerist bureaucrats who have managed to deceive several generations of American 
policymakers and the public about both the necessity and value of their work. The 
information our vast espionage network acquires at considerable human and ethical 



The CIA and the Intelligence Community 147 



costs is generally insignificant or irrelevant to our policymakers' needs. Our espi- 
onage establishment differs hardly at all from many other federal bureaucracies, 
having transformed itself into a self-serving interest group immeasurably aided by 
secrecy." 

Some in Congress have acknowledged that this traitor has accurately describe 
the sham that is the CIA. Little of value is really accomplished, but you always 
had to look busy. Ames exposed almost every important CIA operation and agent 
in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the mid-1980s, but the CIA ignored 
evidence that he was a spy. The FBI even saw Ames improperly meeting secretly 
with the Soviets in 1986, but the CIA did nothing. By 1989 the CIA knew that 
Ames had paid $540,000 cash for a home; yet he only earned $69,000 a year. In 
1991 Ames failed a lie detector test, but was passed anyway. The CIA took two 
years to investigate a report that Ames was living well beyond his means."' 

Ames was once found drunk in a Rome gutter while working for the CIA. It 
was also fairly common for him to fall asleep at his desk in the afternoon after his 
drinking binge during lunch. According to the Los Angeles Times, the Dominion 
Bank of Virginia told the IRS that Ames was depositing large sums of money but 
no action was taken." A child could have identified Ames as a high security risk, 
yet people on the Senate oversight committee were amazed at all this, because 
they have no understanding of what takes place in the CIA. Naturally CIA director 
Woolsey fired no one over the Ames affair. 

There is more to this fiasco than we have been told. On the day Ames was 
arrested the New York Times reported that he worked in the CIAs "narcotics intel- 
ligence operation."" In a detailed article on Ames' involvement in the drug war, 
The Wall Street Journal said Ames was "a key figure" in stopping drug trafficking, 
and asked if he was somehow involved with the KGB in the drug trade?' 5 Another 
suspicious fact is that Ames often visited Columbia where his wife is from. Part 
of the money paid to Ames by the KGB came from U.S. taxpayers out of western 
aid money sent to Russia." However, did the money he received come only from 
the KGB or also from Columbian drug gangs? 

Reportedly Ames was paid several million dollars by the KGB which he spent 
lavishly. We are told he was quite careless or stupid in not hiding such wealth. It 
is one thing to believe that Ames was careless or stupid, but it goes beyond belief 
to agree with the press that several regulatory agencies were also so negligent. 
Many regulatory agencies are well aware that the CIA has been heavily involved in 
illegal drug trafficking for many years, and that especially when national security 
is proclaimed, the CIA is left alone. As a kingpin in the CIA's drug operations, 
Ames would be justified in believing that he was protected. As one more drug 
dealer in the CIA no one would touch him. Many in the CIA have large sums of 
money from their illegal drug operations. 

Peter Maas, in Killer Spy, said after some months of investigating Ames, 
enough evidence had been gathered so that the FBI wanted him arrested. They 
needed permission from the Justice Department which initially refused, supposedly 
because if Ames and his wife were arrested, there would be no one to take care of 
their young son, and the press would be very upset. Remember Ames had caused 
the arrest and death of many CIA agents in the Soviet Union, and he was suspected 
of being one of the worst spies in our nation's history. Aside from the fact that a 
grandmother was available to care for the son, we are supposed to believe that the 
Justice Department suddenly became a social welfare department. Certain people in 



148 Treason The New World Order 



the Justice Department and CIA were very nervous that Ames' arrest would reveal 
illegal drug trafficking operations. 

In late 1995 it was revealed that Ames helped the Russians plant double 
agents, who for years fed false information to the CIA. The CIA realized in 1991 
these agents were providing disinformation but 95 reports were provided to policy 
makers including two presidents, usually without even a warning that the inform- 
ation provided might be false. These reports overestimated Soviet economic and 
military strength, probably causing the U.S. to needlessly spend billions of dollars 
for defense. The New York Times, in an editorial, said when an intelligence 
agency willingly misleads the government with disinformation from the commu- 
nists this "is as out of control as it gets.'" 4 Senator Specter interviewed a Russian 
expert in the CIA for 42 years. The retired agent said providing information from 
suspected double agents was proper and it was the role of the CIA not higher 
officials to make this decision. Not understanding that Congress is irrelevant to 
the intelligence community, Senator Specter was shocked." 

The last president who tried to curtail the CIA was President Kennedy. This is 
one reason he was killed. In the name of national security, the mantra of the intel- 
ligence community, any act is acceptable even if it destroys the democratic fabric 
of our Republic. Many in the intelligence community feel their experience enables 
them to understand the security needs of the U.S. better than America's elected 
officials. The dangerous fanatics who have perpetuated so many atrocities upon the 
American people in the name of national security are far more dangerous to the 
survival of this Republic as a free society than was ever the case with commu- 
nism. People in the security state felt international communism needed to be 
stopped even if America was turned into a police state in the process. 

A good example of what a career in the CIA does to people is the book, The 
Twilight of Democracy, by Patrick E. Kennon. He worked in the CIA for 25 years 
and concluded that instead of a democracy run by the people we need a society run 
by skilled technocrats. Efficiency is more important than free will and freedom. 
Run by "faceless but expert bureaucrats" democracy has triumphed as an ideology 
but not as a system of government. He said democracy "has become marginal as a 
system of government" so we should turn to bureaucratic experts in the "relentless 
march of specialization." Specialization demands bureaucracy. 

George McGovern said: "If it is acceptable for the CIA to break the law in the 
name of national security, why shouldn't others place national security above and 
beyond the reach of the Constitution?" The Founding Fathers "would have been 
appalled by the secretive, unchecked unilateral operations that have been carried on 
by the Presidents and their staffs in recent decades. ...Unfortunately, many of our 
Presidents since the end of World War II have violated the law and the Constitu- 
tion. From Korea, the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam to Watergate, Iran and the covert 
war in Nicaragua, Presidents have weakened the nation and their own credibility by 
dishonoring the Constitution. Most of these violations have been made in the 
name of national security...."" At what point does the incessant paranoia over 
national security, which is so often just an excuse for illegal criminal activities, 
become treason. Thousands of American citizens have lost their constitutional 
rights, sometimes being killed, in the name of national security. 

Many Americans think congressional oversight committees are actually keep- 
ing track of the intelligence community, but this has always been a complete 
myth. How can the oversight committees do their job when for years they have no 



The CIA and the Intelligence Community 149 



idea what programs the money is being spent on? Congress is told the magic 
words, national security, and an inquiry ends. In 1987 the National Academy of 
Public Administration concluded that congressional oversight is "more geared to 
garnering media attention than making government work better...." In 1991 
Common Cause Magazine published a review of the congressional oversight 
committees. They concluded that "Congress on the whole is failing to carry out its 
government oversight responsibility." Oversight is a key role of Congress to see 
where money is spent and how programs are carried out, but our representatives are 
more interested in raising money to be reelected. 

In the 1970s Congress changed the federal budget-writing process so that 
budget power was concentrated on new budget committees. Other committees lost 
control over the federal budget. During the 1980s many committees rewrote their 
rules removing the power to issue subpoenas or launch investigations. Today, 
oversight committees rarely conduct serious investigations. Constitutional checks 
and balances no longer apply. Experienced investigators like Thomas Trimboli get 
fired from oversight committees, because they take their job seriously. Few 
whistleblowers are now willing to come to Congress because nothing is done. 

Many have provided evidence to Congress that the CIA and other government 
agencies are flooding the country with illegal drugs, but Congress does nothing. 
Congress had evidence of the S&L scam long before anything was done. By the 
time action was taken the cost was far higher than it needed to have been. There 
was evidence that the Reagan administration was illegally supporting the 
Nicaraguan contras at least two years before the Iran-contra hearings. Congress re- 
fused to investigate the charges by Knight Ridder that there were detailed plans to 
remove the Constitution and establish a police state with FEMA arresting over 
100,000 people. And no one in Congress is willing to find out where the $28-30 
billion annual black budget goes in the intelligence community." 

Congress is worried about leaks of classified information when it should focus 
on the abuses of power by the intelligence agencies. Ralph McGhee said in Deadly 
Deceits: "There is a little bit of fear that if you go after the intelligence commu- 
nity your career is threatened." Stich in Defrauding America, said the CIA has the 
power to destroy any politician who threatens it." The CIA is getting increasingly 
involved in domestic politics, which is illegal. When Rep. Henry Gonzalez at- 
tacked the Bush regime for helping arm Iraq before the Gulf War, Bush used the 
CIA to block this investigation and had the CIA investigate Gonzalez for revealing 
supposedly top secret information." It is extremely dangerous in a free society to 
use the CIA to attack one's political foes. 

The November, 1993 issue of Criminal Politics reported that NAFTA passed 
by a much higher vote than had been expected partly because the CIA lobbied in- 
tensely, even threatening to expose illegal activities by certain members of 
Congress if they didn't approve NAFTA. Worth magazine also reported on this 
lobbying, although the discussion was toned down in this widely read financial 
magazine.*" Close monitoring including electronic surveillance of Congress by the 
intelligence community has gone on for decades. Evidence is gathered to blackmail 
people. The CIA reportedly threatened to reveal the pedophile activity of a senator 
in 1991 to force him to vote a certain way. His vote was switched. The CIA has 
long provided children to certain members of Congress and other influential people 
partly to blackmail them. Along with the CIA and FBI, the mob and foreign 
intelligence agencies also have prostitute rings in Washington to gather 



150 Treason The New World Order 



information. 41 Hoover kept detailed files on many people in Congress and this 
information was used at times. This was discussed in various books such as From 
the Secret Files of J. Edgar Hoover by Athan Theoharis. Members of Congress 
may be investigated by federal agencies or as with Senator Church after his in- 
vestigation of the CIA, the opposition may be funded to defeat someone." The 
president and key people in Congress must support the intelligence community or 
they will be black mailed, defeated in office, or even be executed by a heart attack 
or an accident. 

Former Nebraska state representative John W. DeCamp wrote The Franklin 
Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska describing how young 
children were kidnapped and used for sex. Some were taken to Washington parties 
and the 1992 Republican convention for sex. Some were also killed in satanic 
activity. State and federal prosecutors took part in the cover-up, and various public 
officials identified in the book threatened to sue DeCamp, but no one ever did. 
Perhaps fifteen people were murdered, including the chief investigator for the 
Nebraska legislature in this cover-up. 

The CIA is an extremely dangerous organization that is anathema to the sur- 
vival of America as a free society. Its continued existence is a disaster waiting to 
happen. In 1991 and again in 1993 Senator Daniel Moynihan introduced the End 
of the Cold War Act, proposing to abolish the CIA and transfer its activities to the 
State Department and Pentagon, where there could be more political oversight. 
Moynihan said: "We have become a national-security state, a country mobilized 
for war on a permanent basis, and we got into the business of saying everything is 
secret. Can we recover the memory of what we were before we became what we are 
now? Can we recover a sense of proportion in the national-security state? The task 
of purging the Cold War from our institutions is enormous." 

Former CIA agent McGehee feels that the CIA should be abolished and that it 
isn't salvageable. It is too much under the political control of presidents and the 
NSC to produce accurate intelligence. The CIA is only one of 13 intelligence- 
gathering agencies. While it analyzes foreign economics, many think tanks and 
universities do the same. There is vast duplication and waste of spending with the 
$28-30 billion intelligence budget that would be lessened if the CIA was closed. 
The Ames fiasco was only one example of bureaucratic sclerosis. Many intelli- 
gence reports produced by the CIA have been extremely inaccurate. The CIA also 
often blocked military intelligence from deploying officers who spoke foreign 
languages and who could mix with the local population." 

I. F. Stone said: "The biggest menace to American freedom is the intelligence 
community." Presidential edicts that place the intelligence community above the 
law should be cancelled. No one should be above the law. National security should 
never be a valid excuse to prevent someone from defending themself. Most forms 
of covert operations should be criminalized. This would help shift the intelligence 
community to intelligence gathering and analysis. And the intelligence commu- 
nity should be required to submit its budget for a full review each year as required 
by all branches of the government under Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. 

There should be a new monitoring agency carefully directed by Congress with 
the job of closely monitoring all intelligence agencies. This organization should 
have the power to, at any time, without advanced notice, review any files and at 
any installation throughout the country. The members of this agency should have 
the highest security clearance and be carefully chosen because of their belief and 



The CIA and the Intelligence Community 151 



loyalty to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. There are many retired CIA agents 
who are disgusted by the illegal activities of that organization. Some of these 
people would be excellent leaders of this new agency. The government already has 
similar agencies with agents to monitor, for example, banks and stock brokers, so 
this proposal is not unique. This is the only way a Republic can survive with an 
intelligence community. It must be closely monitored. 

Government wiretaps and searches should only be done with a court order that 
also fulfills the standards of the Bill of Rights. National security should never be 
used as an exception. Government bureaucrats who destroy or refuse to provide 
evidence as required by Congress should automatically be fired and then face civil 
and criminal charges including obstruction of justice. There is no room in gov- 
ernment for people who deliberately hide information from the people's elected 
representatives. Congress with its investigative, subpoena, contempt, grant of 
immunity, and perjury powers already has the ability to control the bureaucracy. 
Unfortunately, this power is rarely exercised. 

Despite the end of the cold war there have been few changes in the American 
intelligence community. Instead of working to dismantle the CIA and the intelli- 
gence community, the emphasis has been to develop new roles to maintain it. 
"The CIA of the 1990s is a vast global bureaucracy in search of a mission." 44 The 
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence proposed in February, 1992 that the CIA 
focus more on terrorism, environmental intelligence, and aiding transnational cor- 
porations with economic intelligence. 4 ' If the intelligence community expands 
into numerous areas not directly involving intelligence, we will inevitably suffer 
from the same pattern of abuses and criminality that has existed for so many years. 

Already the CIA has shifted more to economic espionage. R. Buckminster 
Fuller said the CIA was "Capitalism's Invisible Army." 4 * "The CIA, the FBI and 
other parts of the intelligence community are working hand in hand with the U.S. 
Fortune 500 and high-tech 'Third Wave' firms to spy on corporate and government 
officials overseas — and to thwart foreign economic espionage aimed at American 
companies." Many CIA agents now serve overseas, working undercover in busi- 
nesses to gather intelligence, and people working in certain industries are recruited 
as spies. 4 ' Yet the CIA continued proclaiming that the Soviet Union was an 
economic giant until the fall of the Berlin wall. "And while the CIA uses our tax 
dollars to slavishly serve the interests of megacorporations, these same firms are 
busy exporting jobs and bilking the government on taxes and Pentagon 
contracts." 4 * 

Ever since World War II the military and secret police power of the U.S. has 
steadily increased, while our national security has decreased. The cold war against 
the Soviet Union is over and now the enemy is the American people. In the name 
of protecting the country our constitutional form of government is gradually dis- 
appearing. A security apparatus doesn't just close up shop. However devoid of 
reality, from the bomber and missile gap in the 1960s and the errors in estimating 
Soviet military spending, the CIA always came up with excuses to justify its 
budget and continued existence. To restore constitutional government the CIA 
must be disbanded with all its drug traffickers arrested. 



153 



Chapter XII 
State and Federal Police 



"If I told you what I really know it would be very dangerous to the country. Our 
whole political system could be disrupted." 

J. Edgar Hoover 

"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to 
harass our people, and eat out their substance. ...In every stage of these 
Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms. Our 
repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose 
character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the 
ruler of a free people." 

Declaration of Independence 



Until the 20th century, law enforcement was generally a local and state 
responsibility as required by the Constitution. The FBI was established in July, 
1908 as a branch of the Justice Department. Between 1917 and 1921 its agents 
compiled files on 200,000 people and organizations. Congressional critics of the 
government were monitored with break-ins of congressmen's offices. 1 Between 
1917 and 1921 two thirds of the states enacted sedition laws that made certain 
speeches, writings, and associations illegal. These laws were used against many 
groups not advocating violence, and the corporate elite used them to block union 
activities. During the Palmer raids on January 2, 1920, almost 10,000 people were 
arrested in 30 cities, usually without warrants. Most of these people were released 
with all charges dropped, although some were deported. Ultimately these laws were 
declared a violation of the First Amendment. 

Harassment of political protestors and minority groups has long existed and 
been well documented. On the rare occasion when Congress investigates these 
cases, the agencies often refuse to comply with requests for information or 
evidence is destroyed. Despite what people think, the Justice Department and FBI 
provided little help to the civil rights movement unless there was national 
attention. Mary King, closely involved in the struggle for civil rights in the South 
during the 1960s, said in the book, Freedom Song: "The FBI, supposed to be 
upholding the Constitution, was a major factor in the thwarting of constitutional 
rights for blacks in the South. Julian Bond and I made it a practice to report any 
incident or atrocity to the FBI, a formality we knew in advance would be futile, 
because of the frequent collusion between the FBI and local law officers. ...The FBI 
agents in the South tended to be segregationists....'" 

COINTELPRO was a secret program established by the FBI "to expose, 
disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize" American citizens who were 
political dissidents. The existence of COINTELPRO was confirmed in March, 



154 Treason The New World Order 



1971, when FBI files were burglarized in Media, Pennsylvania. Hoover supported 
COINTELPRO, recommending that political activist be arrested on drug charges 
and that disinformation be used to cause confusion and disrupt political activity. 1 
In 1968 Hoover signed a directive to "expose, disrupt, and otherwise neutralize the 
activities of various new Left organizations." 

People were fired, mail was opened, many were audited, phones were wire- 
tapped without warrants, propaganda and lies were fed to the media, and files were 
stolen. Peaceful groups were intimidated, and lawful political activities were 
disrupted. The FBI created violence in the ghettos and destroyed civil rights 
groups, discrediting them with forged documents. There were hundreds of illegal 
break-ins, theft of membership lists, encouragement of gang warfare, and infiltra- 
tion of groups with agent provocateurs. M. Wesley Swearingen, an FBI agent for 
25 years, confessed to participating in 238 break-ins. He said FBI agents had lied 
in many cities about their illegal activities. 

In 1971 Robert Hardy was recruited and ordered by the FBI to lead a raid on 
the Camden Selective Service office. Everyone was arrested but the "Camden 28" 
were all acquitted because the FBI had engineered the crime. During Watergate it 
was revealed that the FBI had disrupted the activities of The Socialist Workers 
party for a decade. To seek social change meant you were the enemy. All this was 
done in the name of national security. 

At a 1971 conference on the FBI held at Princeton University Thomas I. 
Emerson said: "The inescapable message of much of the material we have covered 
is that the FBI jeopardizes the whole system of freedom of expression which is the 
cornerstone of an open society. ...The Bureau's concept of its function, as dedicated 
guardian of the national security, to collect general political intelligence, to engage 
in preventive surveillance, to carry on warfare against potentially disruptive or 
dissenting groups is wholly inconsistent with a system that stipulates that the 
government may not discourage political dissent or efforts to achieve social change 
so long as the conduct does not involve the use of force, violence or similar illegal 
action. ...The government is so obsessed with its law-and-order function, so ridden 
with bureaucratic loyalties, so vulnerable to its own investigators that it cannot be 
trusted to curb its police force." 

When the Senate Intelligence Committee investigated COINTELPRO it re- 
jected excuses that the program was needed to protect national security. Instead it 
found that the real purpose was "maintaining the existing social and political 
order." Congressional investigations in the 1970s found that the CIA mail 
opening program contributed to a list of 1.5 million Americans in CIA comput- 
ers.* The FBI created a list of over one million Americans from its surveillance 
activities, and it has a security index which lists up to 200,000 people to be 
arrested in a national emergency.' Senator Tunney in 1975 said the FBI maintained 
15,000 names of people who would be arrested during an emergency. Over the 
years the FBI has several times ignored orders to stop keeping such lists." The 
NSA monitored every cable sent overseas from 1947 to 1975. Army intelligence 
investigated over 100,000 Americans during the Vietnam War.' The House Un- 
American Activities Committee admitted that in its first 25 years it had gathered 
"300,000 card references to the activities and affiliations of individuals." It would 
be extremely naive to think that this vast criminality stopped in the 1970s just 
because Congress held some investigations. 



State and Federal Police 155 



COINTELPRO supposedly ended in the 1970s, but attacks on political 
activists continued with only the name changing. Ex-FBI agent M. Wesley 
Swearingen admitted in a 1980 interview, "Nothing else changed. We just kept 
right on using all the same illegal techniques for repressing political dissent we'd 
used all along. Only we began framing what we were doing in terms of 
'combating terrorism' rather than neutralizing political extremists." The people 
and the press moved on to other issues, and the crimes continued in the name of 
protecting national security and the corporate elite. Various agents openly admitted 
lying before Congress." "The lesson of Hoover's directorship — that a quasi-au- 
tonomous secret police agency can undermine democratic principles — has not been 
effectively addressed by Congress or the executive....'" 

Federal authorities also killed people under COINTELPRO. On December 4, 
1969 an apartment in Illinois was raided with Black Panther Party leaders Fred 
Hampton and Mark Clark killed. Others in the apartment were arrested and later 
accused of violent acts at press conferences. Then all charges were dropped. In 
November, 1982 after years of litigation, the government finally admitted that the 
FBI had violated the civil rights of the two murdered Black Panther leaders as well 
as others imprisoned that night, and SI. 85 million was paid to the survivors of the 
deceased. In 1970 a car bomb killed student organizers Ralph Featherstone and Che 
Payne. The bomb was believed to have been planted by an FBI agent. " The FBI 
also worked with the Secret Army Organization, a right wing group that stored 
weapons, bombed radical groups, and tried to assassinate people targeted as radical 
political activists. 

George and Joseph Stiner, believed to be FBI provocateurs, murdered L.A. 
Panther leaders Alprentice Carter and Jon Huggins on January 17, 1969. While 
they were convicted and sentenced to long prison terms, they somehow escaped 
from San Quentin in 1974. They have not been heard from since, and they may 
have entered the Federal Witness Protection Program. After Carter and Huggins 
were murdered, FBI agent Richard Held sent a memo to FBI headquarters describing 
the operation as a success. On May 23, 1969 another Black Panther, John Savage, 
was killed, as was Black Panther Slyvester Bell in San Diego on August 14, 
1969. In July, 1970 in Houston, Texas police killed Carl Hampton, black leader 
of the People's Party. According to released information, FBI operatives probably 
killed at least six to nine Black Panthers. 

Labor activists like Karen Silkwood were also harassed or killed. Silkwood 
died in a bizarre car accident in 1974 while trying to give Kerr-McGee documents 
to a New York Times reporter. The FBI, ignoring the evidence, quickly closed the 
case. It sabotaged congressional inquiries and attacked Silkwood as a drug addict. In 
the 1970s FBI penetration of the American Indian Movement (AIM) resulted in the 
murders of Mae Aquash and Jancita Eagle Deer in 1976." In 1978 two members 
of the Puerto Rican independence movement were killed by a special local police 
unit the FBI managed. The Puerto Rican intelligence bureau acknowledged in court 
that files were kept on 74,000 people." 

During a 1976 lawsuit against the Chicago Police, it was discovered that the 
department's security section kept files on 800 groups including the League of 
Women Voters and the NAACP. Hundreds of agents were assigned to infiltrate 
these groups. The Feds helped a militant group, the Legion of Justice, to physi- 
cally attack dissidents. In 1982 the ACLU filed a suit against the L. A. police red 
squad for similar activities. In 1992 Mike Rothmiller, in L.A. Secret Police: 



156 Treason The New World Order 



Inside the LAPD Elite Spy Network, revealed much about the L.A. secret police." 
Illegal surveillance was common, and no suspicion of criminal activity was nec- 
essary. 

Almost no one in the government was punished for these illegal activities. 
Citizens should have an efficient method to complain when abused by the police, 
beyond the cumbersome, corrupt, and expensive judiciary. Many people who 
attempt to change the status quo by pointing out the problems of society are 
labeled terrorists. When Reagan took office he pardoned the only two jailed FBI 
officials convicted of authorizing illegal break-ins in the 1970s. What was the 
high principle that Reagan spoke of when he pardoned these people? Is there a 
principle above the Constitution and the rule of law? 

In the 1980s the FBI spied on various peace groups including the Physicians 
for Social Responsibility. In 1988 it was learned that the FBI had kept a file on 
former Rep. Phillip Burton for 18 years." Ross Gelbspan, in Break-Ins, Death 
Threats and the FBI, described extensive illegal FBI activities against critics of 
U.S. policy in Central America. According to the Center for Constitutional 
Rights in New York, since 1984 there have been over 300 suspicious incidents 
with 150 unexplained break-ins. In 1987 Peter Dale Scott was researching a book 
on drugs, weapons, death squads, and the contras, with support from the Inter- 
national Center for Development Policy in Washington. Someone entered the 
center's offices and stole certain relevant files." 

In the summer of 1989 Congress announced that 1,600 groups had been im- 
properly targeted and harassed. A list of these groups was never published. 
"Organizations that are targeted and penetrated by secret federal agents are seriously 
disrupted. The public record is replete with exposes of agents encouraging illegal 
activity, including murder, to discredit the organization in question."" Then the 
Justice Department goes after them, and the public sees them as criminals. If 
individuals or groups aren't in the quiet middle class, as defined by our corporate 
masters, they get demonized by the press and are harassed by government agents. 

The past illegal activities of the FBI against American citizens has been well 
documented in many books." What is less well known is that these activities 
continue today. In recent years environmentalists, people who want to legalize 
drugs like marijuana, third party movements, supporters of jury nullification, and 
the Patriot movement and militias are targets of government harassment. 

In the fall of 1993 the Associated Press (AP) reviewed 17 complaints of 
brutality by the Bureau of Indian Affairs Police on six reservations. After a six 
month investigation, the AP concluded that excessive force was used with little 
discipline. In 1992 and 1993 America's Watch issued two reports on the brutality 
of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Homeschoolers are harassed in 
many states. Postal inspectors visit corporations to review company records in 
search of violations, and then says it is being lenient with its fines because viola- 
tors could be sentenced to 30 days in jail. 

The FDA conducts numerous raids throughout the U.S. using local police. 
For instance, the clinic of Jonathan Wright, MD. was raided on May 6, 1992. 
With guns drawn police broke down the door and ordered people to raise their 
hands. This was a medical clinic that looked like any in America; the only "crime" 
here was that natural remedies were being used. In a 14 hour search dangerous 
items like U.S. postage stamps were seized along with S100,000 in medical 
supplies. An editorial in the main local newspaper, the Seattle Post Intelligencer, 



State and Federal Police 157 



demanded an explanation for "the Gestapo-like tactics used in" this raid." In 1995 
all charges were dropped, but the medical supplies weren't returned. 

The FBI office in San Francisco has over 600 pages of documents on Earth 
First. It has been watching this group since it was founded in 1980." In 1982 the 
FBI tried to get an extortion indictment against an Earth Firster who gave Interior 
Secretary James Watt a letter threatening civil disobedience if he continued to push 
policies that damaged the environment. Prosecutors said there was no case. The 
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia trains all federal 
agents except the FBI and DEA. It has a domestic terrorism course that includes 
Earth First and the Animal Liberation Front. They also watch other supposed 
terrorist groups like Greenpeace. 20 

Four Earth Firsters, including the founder Dave Foreman, were arrested in 
Arizona in 1989 on conspiracy charges for attempting to bomb power lines. A 
government agent, Michael Fain, had infiltrated Earth First and urged the activists 
to break the law, even providing acetylene tanks to cause the destruction. Defense 
evidence at the trial included an FBI tape that they wanted to "pop" Foreman "to 
send a message." The government spent S2 million over two years to infiltrate 
Earth First. A star witness for the government had a serious drug problem and was 
paid by the FBI in cash to avoid an IRS tax lien. 

On May 24, 1990 Earth First Activists Darryl Cherney and Judi Bari were 
injured, Bari very seriously, when a bomb exploded in the car they were driving. 
Within minutes of the explosion, the FBI Terrorist Squad arrived and according to 
court testimony said "these were the types of people who would be involved in 
carrying a bomb.... These people, in fact, qualified as terrorists." According to the 
FBI and Oakland police, the bomb was planted behind the driver's seat, which 
allegedly proved that the two saw it and knowingly transported a bomb. However, 
photos taken at the scene definitely proved that the bomb was placed under the 
driver's seat. Photos showed the back seat was barely damaged, while the front seat 
was extensively damaged. Also, the bomb was wrapped in nails and triggered to 
explode from motion. It would be suicide to knowingly drive with such a device. 

Bari and Cherney were immediately arrested after the bombing, Bari during 
surgery, and charged with illegal possession of explosives. To support this false 
charge, Cherney's house and van were searched without a warrant. The head of the 
FBI office in San Francisco at this period was Richard W. Held, who had directed 
many COINTELPRO programs. The prosecutor three times delayed the proceeding 
claiming there were no other suspects. During this period the national press 
slandered the two victims calling them eco-terrorists per the FBI line. As in a 
police state, the government announces the guilty and the controlled press follows 
the party line. On July 17, 1990 all charges were dropped from a lack of evidence, 
but for over two years the FBI continued looking for evidence to use against Bari 
and Cherney. 

Fifty environmental groups demanded a congressional investigation, but when 
Rep. Don Edward's subcommittee demanded information the FBI refused. In May, 
1991 Bari and Cherney sued the FBI and Oakland police for false arrest, illegal 
search, and civil rights violations. They claimed that the FBI and Oakland police 
plotted to frame them. Held, also named as a defendant in the suit, failed to settle 
the case, so at 52 he retired from the FBI. The courts three times found there was 
sufficient evidence to proceed to trial, but the FBI continued to withhold evidence 
from Bari and Cherney. 



158 Treason The New World Order 



Gradually the court forced the FBI to release its files to the plaintiffs. The car 
bombing occurred just before the start of the 1990 Redwood Summer Earth First 
campaign to save the redwood forest, and Earth Firsters, including Bari, had 
received death threats. Bari obtained 5,000 pages of FBI documents of the investi- 
gation showing there was no attempt to search for the real bomber. When the FBI 
finally closed its official investigation on October, 1992, it had never even 
investigated the death threats against the environmentalists. Death threat letters 
were never even sent to a lab for analysis." 

Even more remarkable, evidence released showed that two weeks before the 
bombing, the FBI held a bomb school in the redwood forest. Four Oakland police 
officers and two FBI teachers, including Frank Doyle, Jr., attended the school and 
then appeared at the car bombing just after it occurred. Doyle directed the investi- 
gation and said the bomb was behind not under the driver's seat. Evidence 
surrendered by the FBI in the lawsuit included a tape with one agent laughing and 
saying: "This is it. This was the final exam." No one has explained why the FBI 
was teaching police how to plant car bombs! During the bomb school, a bomb 
with the same solder, tape, glue, and other components as the Bari car bomb ex- 
ploded at a local timber mill. Environmentalists were blamed for this act. 

The bombing was used as an excuse to harass and establish closer surveillance 
over environmentalists throughout the U.S. To investigate the bombing, the FBI 
obtained letters-to-the editor files from North Coast California newspapers. Only 
the Santa Rosa Press Democrat refused to comply with this demand. Mike 
Geniella, a reporter for this newspaper, wrote an article criticizing the bombing 
investigation and the FBI's targeting of Earth First in various states. Two weeks 
later the Press Democratic, which is owned by the New York Times, removed this 
award winning reporter from the timber beat. In the new world order the definition 
of a free press will change dramatically. 

The FBI also gathered the names of local environmentalists from the police to 
build its file of names. However, the FBI did not seek the names of those 
harassing and assaulting environmentalists. The FBI even compiled a list of 634 
people nationally who had spoken by phone with Earth First, and it gathered 
detailed information on these people. Here we get a peek at how the FBI quietly 
continues to monitor thousands of people." 

On August 4, 1995 a van belonging to someone in the U.S. Forest Service 
was destroyed by a bomb. The media uniformly described this as the work of 
government protestors. With the FBI teaching the police how to set car bombs and 
the ATF conducting exercises in setting car bombs (see Chapter XVI), did the 
government blow up this car so certain groups could be criticized? 

Local police also often violate people's rights. In Blood Carnage and the 
Agent Provocateur, Alex Constantine presented evidence that outside provocateurs 
were involved in the 1965 and 1992 L.A. riots. In the 1992 riot a former police 
dog trainer admitted that the L.A. Police Department (LAPD) sent him into Kore- 
atown to ignite flares at Korean-owned shops, especially when blacks drove by. 
The LAPD has for years worked closely with the CIA and other intelligence 
agencies. Residents in parts of L.A. saw outsiders deliberately setting fires. Police 
inaction obviously made the riots worse. The delayed deployment of the National 
Guard was also conveniently explained. Compton city councilwoman Patricia 
Moore said the police and government started the riot, and the panel appointed to 



State and Federal Police 159 



investigate the riots included CFR members like Warren Christopher and former 
CIA head John McCone. 

In 1993 New York state troopers were arrested for providing false evidence to 
get convictions. Now there is a police scandal in New Orleans and a massive 
scandal in Philadelphia with federal prosecutors subpoenaing 100,000 arrest records 
to identify who was falsely imprisoned. In Brunswick, Ohio on April 1, 1995, a 
social worker complained that John Lekan owned guns and, although no laws were 
broken, within an hour two police arrived. Lekan wouldn't let them in without a 
warrant and started singing the national anthem. When they broke down the door 
one was shot. Lekan and his nine year-old son were killed after a 45 hour siege 
involving 300 police and 200 firemen. During the assault a tank used tear gas. The 
police claim Lekan killed his son and himself, but no one believes this. Numerous 
shots were fired at the house and, once inside the home, the police removed the 
invalid wife and then two shots were fired. After this massacre, residents were 
warned to not repeat what they had witnessed, and more people joined militia 
units. The Cleveland Plains Dealer, one of the largest newspapers in Ohio, 
published a cartoon with the word "Brunswaco." When I asked permission to use 
that illustration for this book I was told "They didn't want to get involved." 
Perhaps it would irritate an advertiser or the government. The town hired ex-FBI 
agent William P. Callis to investigate the raid, and he concluded that the police 
were too eager to use force and an armored vehicle should not have been used. 

On June 28, 1995 Mike Hill, a militia chaplain and former policeman, was 
killed by a state trooper while walking towards the trooper's car at 2:30 a.m. He 
had been stopped because of his license plate. Three other militia members who 
witnessed the killing confirmed that Hill wasn't touching the weapon by his belt, 
and the AP quoted the local sheriff Bernie Gibson as saying: "No officer's life had 
been threatened." Yet CBS Evening News on April 2, 1996 said Hill had pulled a 
gun. 

In 1992 there was a standoff at Ruby Ridge, Idaho between Randy Weaver and 
his family and federal agents. Weaver, who had no criminal record and had served 
with valor in Vietnam, had failed to appear in court on a charge of possessing 
illegal firearms. He was deliberately entrapped by a federal informant who, for 
three years, solicited him to cut the barrels of several shotguns a quarter-inch 
below the legal limit. He never manufactured firearms and had not previously 
possessed an illegal firearm. The ATF incorrectly believed Weaver belonged to a 
Nazi group, so they entrapped him; and then they said he must infiltrate and spy 
on this group or be indicted. Weaver, arrested and indicted after refusing, became 
concerned for his life and property after court personnel gave conflicting statements 
about the case, including false statements that he might lose his property and 
children. One court official sent Weaver a notice to appear in court on the wrong 
day, so Weaver didn't appear in court on the correct date. A Justice Department 
attorney, aware of this error, still issued an arrest warrant. 

The U.S. marshals made no attempt to meet with Weaver to serve the arrest 
warrant, but Weaver tried to negotiate a surrender if his safety was guaranteed. The 
marshals drafted a letter of acceptance, but the U.S. Attorney for Idaho suddenly 
ordered that negotiations end." The marshals launched an 18 month surveillance 
and got military aerial reconnaissance photos taken by the Defense Mapping 
Agency. They even bought land next to the Weavers, intending to build a cabin 



160 Treason The New World Order 



and befriend him. The Weaver's mail was intercepted, psychological profiles were 
done, and $130,000 worth of spy cameras were installed. 

Finally, six U.S. marshals came with no warrant, gave no warning, and never 
identified themselves. They deliberately upset the family dog and, when it started 
barking, they killed it. They fired at 14 year old Samuel Weaver and a friend, 
Kevin Harris. Not aware who these armed strangers were, they returned the fire. 
U.S. marshal Degan was killed, although no one is certain who killed him. As 
Samuel turned to run he was shot in the back and killed. The government immed- 
iately brought in from Washington, D.C. the FBI Hostage Rescue Team. While 
400 federal agents were brought in, no attempt was initially made to contact 
Weaver and negotiate a surrender. Bo Gritz and at least one other source said the 
FBI almost dropped a gasoline fire bomb on the log cabin from a helicopter to end 
the siege. That would have killed most of the inhabitants as at Waco. When 
several family members and Harris returned to the shed where they had taken 
Samuel's body, they were fired on by government snipers, hitting Randy and 
Harris. Weaver's wife Vicki was shot through the head while holding her 10 
month-old baby, blowing away half her face. Dick Rodgers, an FBI official, told 
Bo Gritz they deliberately targeted Vicki Weaver because a psychiatrist told them 
she would kill the kids before surrendering to the FBI. 

These were trained marksmen. The FBI agent who killed Vicki Weaver from 
200 yards testified at the trial that he could, at 200 yards, hit a target smaller than 
a dime. When Congress held hearings in September, 1995 this agent and others 
took the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering questions. However, several agents 
said that Randy Weaver had killed his son, a claim no one believed. Weaver's 
"paranoid fantasy" that the government was conspiring to get him was true, and 
the government constantly lied about the case. During congressional hearings, 
several federal agents said the responsibility for that atrocity resided only with 
Weaver because he sold illegal weapons. 

The Justice Department's internal disciplinary, unit after a long delay, com- 
pleted a 542-page report in April, 1994. The report concluded that the raid violated 
the Constitution and FBI internal procedures and recommended possible criminal 
prosecution of federal officials. Agents were ordered to shoot at any armed adult if 
they had a clear shot, which also violated Idaho law and the normal rules of en- 
gagement. Despite this report the Justice Department refused to prosecute any 
federal agents, saying the agents had reason to believe their lives were in danger so 
their actions were justified." How a mother holding a baby in her arms can 
threaten FBI agents 200 yards away is not something that can only be explained in 
a free society. America should become a country where, if you blow out the brains 
of a mother just holding a baby in her arms, you should face criminal charges even 
if you are in the federal police, but this will not happen unless constitutional 
government is restored. No one should be above the law. 

As a result of the critical report, Larry Potts the FBI agent who supervised the 
raid from Washington received a letter of censure in his file. Although this is the 
mildest of reprimands, Senator Hatch strangely said on national television on 
April 30, 1995 that being censured is a very serious matter. Potts also received a 
letter of censure when he lost a cellular phone. The life of an American citizen is 
worth a hell of a lot more than a telephone. Then Potts was promoted to second in 
command of the FBI. In a May 3, 1995 complaint to the Justice Department, FBI 
agent Eugene Glenn the on-scene commander of the Weaver assault, said Potts had 



State and Federal Police 161 



issued the shoot-on-sight order and that the FBI's review of the operation was 
inaccurate and a cover-up to protect top officials of the bureau. 5 ' In July, 1995 
Potts was demoted and then suspended, partly because FBI agent E. Michael Kahoe 
destroyed documents that would have clarified who issued the shoot-on-sight order. 
However, on March 1, 1996 the U.S. Marshal's Service presented its highest 
award for valor to its agents involved in this raid. 

On April 19, 1993 an ATF assault on the Branch Davidian compound near 
Waco, Texas failed, and the FBI was brought in. It would have been easy to arrest 
the leader David Koresh outside the compound before the raid, and he had previ- 
ously allowed searches of his home and peacefully surrendered in another legal 
case. However, the federal police wanted a show of force. Military helicopters were 
used during the Waco siege, because of a false report that illegal drugs were in the 
compound. The warrant also contained a charge of child abuse. Why did a federal 
warrant list what is strictly a matter for state authorities? Several FBI specialists 
strongly suggested not taking a very confrontational position with Koresh, but 
this advice was rejected. 

During the final assault, as tanks attacked the compound, the FBI said "This 
is not an assault." What was it? For six hours CS gas was pumped into the com- 
pound, although this toxic chemical is illegal under the Chemical Weapons Con- 
vention signed January, 1993 by the U.S. and 100 nations. The government said 
this treaty banned using CS gas in international conflicts not domestically. Are we 
supposed to be comforted by this statement! This highly toxic gas is banned in 
war, but it is acceptable for the Feds to use it against Americans. CS gas is also 
highly flammable under certain circumstances, such as at Waco with a wooden 
structure, high winds, kerosene lanterns, bales of hay in the building, and very dry 
conditions. The evidence suggests that the fire started from the CS gas or the tank 
knocking over the kerosene lanterns. The FBI even blocked attempts to fight the 
fire, keeping the fire trucks away." 

Dr. Alan Stone, a Harvard professor of law and psychiatry asked by the gov- 
ernment to investigate Waco, said medical literature, the CS gas manufacturer, and 
U.S. Army manuals declare CS gas dangerous especially in enclosed spaces and 
with children. Yet just after the Waco atrocity, Janet Reno said she believed CS 
gas was safe. Reno also said she ordered the raid because of concern that the chil- 
dren were being mistreated. Saving children by killing them is a logic that will 
become common in the new world order. The Justice Department report on Waco 
concluded: "Under the circumstances the FBI exhibited extraordinary restraint." 

After the deaths Clinton said: "Janet Reno should not resign just because 
some religious fanatics murdered themselves." Clinton on 60 Minutes said of the 
Davidians "Those people murdered a bunch of innocent law enforcement officials 
and when that raid occurred it was the people who ran that cult compound who 
murdered their own children, not federal officials. They made the decision to de- 
stroy the children that were there." Adolf Hitler couldn't have said it better. In 
court the 11 Davidians had already been found not guilty of such charges. 

The Waco massacre expresses the contempt and fear that the secret govern- 
ment has against fundamental Christians, because they represent a threat to the 
success of the coming dictatorship. Partly because of certain Bible prophecies, 
such as in the Book of Revelations, the machinations of the one world gov- 
ernment are better understood in the fundamental Christian community than by 
many other people. The Los Angeles Times described certain Christians as being 



162 Treason The New World Order 



dangerous extremists. It said the Michigan militia was led by a general who was a 
Baptist preacher." Will the press next claim that all Baptists are extremists? 

The FBI under Louis Freeh is determined to increase its power. Freeh pushed 
for expanded wiretap powers, yet there have been no wiretap requests against 
terrorists since 1988. The FBI has even gone international, setting up offices 
overseas. Crimes, like money laundering, are being used to justify establishing an 
international police force." Senator John Kerry said "Organized crime is the new 
communism, the new monolithic threat." 

In 1994 Peg Bargon, a middle-aged mother in Illinois, gave a native American 
"dream-catcher," a small hoop with feathers to Hillary Clinton. These were 
feathers gathered on the ground but this violated the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. A 
Fish and Wildlife Service agent learned of this "crime," so Bargon was prosecuted 
and fined about $12,000. Her neighbors now call the police to report feathers 
spotted on the ground." One cannot be too careful. In the new world order, one 
must beware of the feather police. 

There was a conflict about a large fossil found by the Black Hills Institute of 
Geological Research, Inc. (BHI) on private land owned by an American Indian, so 
the Feds got involved. On May 14, 1992 the Feds raided the BHI in Hill City, 
South Dakota. School children watching sang the Star-Spangled Banner and 
shouted "Shame, Shame." An FBI agent warned that "if any of those kids cause 
any trouble, they'll be taken down." Federal police can never be too sure about 
young patriots. That the South Dakota National Guard helped in the raid caused 
great anger. There were two other raids and the BHI and its officers faced 156 
charges. The U.S. Attorney cited the 1906 Antiquities Act, although that act has 
been ruled unconstitutional and it specifically exempts fossils. This didn't matter 
to the federal fossil police! Before the trial the judge violated his oath of office by 
participating in plea negotiations that both sides had accepted. The Feds wanted to 
back down, but the judge felt the BHI was guilty! Although no one testified that 
they had been victimized by the BHI, the Feds used 92 witnesses during the seven 
week trial that cost almost $8 million tax dollars. Facing a biased judge, the de- 
fendants were found guilty on several counts, thus expanding federal power, which 
is why the suit was brought initially."' If the Feds weren't so concerned about bird 
feathers and fossils, perhaps they wouldn't need more agents to fight terrorism. 

On October 7, 1994, 70 state and federal agents armed and in flak jackets 
raided the Green House Fine Herbs farm near San Diego. One Fed said the action 
began when they received a report about a rare bird nesting near the farm on the 
local river. During the raid workers were asked about their religious beliefs to see 
if they were in a religious cult. Some workers belonged to a yoga group. Certain 
employees were interrogated for three hours, and 30 boxes of records were seized. 
Reportedly, the authorities were looking for an excuse to seize the property. After 
a 1993 flood washed away over 20 acres, the farm group tried to get a permit to 
reclaim some land but was told by local officials and the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers that one wasn't needed because the work involved farmland. After 200 
truckloads of soil were deposited, a state official said the land now belonged to the 
state, not the farm, because the river had changed course. The flood may have been 
caused by state action upriver. 

A grand jury investigation of this case lasted over a year and probably cost $1 
million. In August, 1995 two growers were indicted for conspiracy and pollution. 
They were charged with dumping illegal waste into the river and a landfill. The 



State and Federal Police 163 



maximum penalty was 11 years in jail and millions in fines. The changing flow 
of a river can be quite expensive in the new world order. U.S. Attorney Alan 
Bersin said the pollution indictments were "a significant step in the government's 
commitment to improve the quality of life." In January, 1996 all charges were 
abruptly dropped. This ridiculous case angered many and, with an election coming, 
Clinton needs California." With the extreme hostility of the FDA towards natural 
healing perhaps herbal terrorist bulletins will soon be issued by the Feds. Will 
this also improve our lives? 

On January 8, 1994 at 7 p.m., about 139 agents from the FBI, ATF, DEA, 
IRS, along with state and local police blocked part of Amite, Louisiana and con- 
ducted a house-to-house search in a mainly black housing development. Was this a 
practice mission to conduct national house-to-house raids with state and federal 
police? The Shreveport Times, on September 20, 1994, described Operation 
Bottoms Up when 200 state, federal, and local police sealed off nine blocks of 
Ledbetter Heights and arrested 45 alleged members of a street gang. Reno praised 
the joint effort and said "the raid was the beginning of the joint federal, state, and 
local enforcement effort...." 

Louis Katona III is a part-time police officer and gun collector. He loaned a 
grenade launcher to the ATF for a criminal trial, but it wasn't returned to him and 
Katona complained about this. The ATF felt Katona had obtained false signatures 
to purchase weapons, so his home was raided in May, 1992 with his firearms and 
car tires intentionally damaged. When his wife came home she was roughed up; 
she started bleeding hours later and had a miscarriage. In September, 1992 Katona 
was charged with 19 federal felonies for falsifying documents regarding the pur- 
chase of his guns. In April, 1994 the judge dismissed all charges before the defense 
even presented its case because the government's case was so weak. He ordered that 
the gun collection be returned, and Katona filed a suit against the government. 
ATF head Magaw agreed that agents could have first asked Katona about the 
signatures before the raid. 

The home of Harry Lamplugh, a veteran, was raided by the ATF in May, 
1994. He had no criminal record and had always carefully followed gun laws. 
When Lamplugh asked if they had a warrant a gun was put to his head and he was 
told to shut up. In eight hours they killed a kitten, opened the mail, damaged 
property, and seized cash, weapons, family medical records, and Lamplugh's mem- 
bership list of 70,000. The warrant said "probable cause" with no other reason 
given for the entry. No one in the family was charged with a crime, but $18,000 
of seized property was forfeited to the government. Lamplugh promotes 40 gun 
shows a year for groups like the American Legion and the Marine Corps League, 
and he openly criticizes Clinton and the ATF. The government wouldn't explain 
why this home was raided. It would be difficult to explain a campaign of terror 
against gun owners as part of the plan to remove guns from the people. In court 
the government said charges of harassment and brutality were "outrageous and 
utterly false." After Lamplugh appeared on the Gordon Liddy radio show, the fam- 
ily received death threats, his office was burglarized, and Lamplugh's wife was 
assaulted and threatened by federal agents who killed several kittens. The Feds are 
also terrorizing people to testify against Lamplugh. 

At 4 a.m. on July 13, 1994 the ATF assaulted Monique Montgomery's home 
wearing Ninja outfits. Montgomery used a registered gun to protect herself against 
the unknown intruders, but of course the agents claimed that they identified them- 



164 Treason The New World Order 



selves. Using high intensity lights the door was broken down and she was shot 
four times. No illegal guns or drugs were found. 

On March 13, 1995 Dr. Jed Cserna was hospitalized in Ely, Nevada after a bad 
accident. Only semiconscious with a broken back, he was visited by a deputy and 
ask if he was armed because of a report that he owned some firearms. Although 
this physician is a member of the Idaho National Guard and a former member of 
the U.S. Forest Service, his home was raided in a search for weapons. The ATF 
got involved, not wanting to miss an opportunity to protect us from this doctor. 
Still in pain Cserna was later arrested and forced to ride 300 miles to be arraigned 
despite his condition. The Ely Daily Times said: "All their (ATF) methods 
accomplished was to convince some Ely citizens that maybe they are jack-booted 
government thugs." Recently Cserna was sentenced to jail for this minor weapons 
violation. Cserna was found guilty of not paying a transfer tax on one of the two 
pistols found at his home. For this "crime" he was sentenced to two years and nine 
months in federal prison, fined $10,000, and his medical license was suspended. 

In one instance, several ATF agents wanted to enter a home without a warrant 
to look for guns. A local deputy got into a shouting argument with them, and told 
them they couldn't enter the home without a warrant. A backup deputy was sent to 
the scene with orders to disarm and arrest the ATF agents for burglary if they 
entered the home without a warrant, so they left." The duty of police officers is to 
protect and serve the people. The Constitution is the highest law in the land, and 
if federal police commit unconstitutional acts, local police have a duty to the peo- 
ple to resist such unlawful intrusions to the fullest extent allowed by the law. 

Sheriff Tim Nettleton of Owyhee County, Idaho announced on May 18, 1995 
that federal law enforcement officials cannot act as armed peace officers in his 
county; if they try they will be arrested." The sheriff of Catron County, N.M. has 
threatened to arrest the local head of the U.S. Forest Service for interfering with 
the right of citizens to graze cattle on public land. Okanogan County, Washington 
commissioners passed a resolution that federal police need the written permission 
of their sheriff to enter the county on official business. Rep. Chenoweth may in- 
troduced legislation requiring federal agents to get permission from the local sheriff 
to enter a county on official business. An ex-sheriff in the Indiana legislature has 
introduced a bill requiring federal agents to first notify sheriffs before taking local 
legal action or face criminal and civil charges. 

In January, 1994 and again in 1995 the ACLU, NRA, and other organizations 
petitioned Clinton to establish a national commission to investigate misconduct 
by federal police agencies and to take action "to reduce constitutional and human 
rights violations" by these agencies. Problems include improper use of deadly 
force, physical and verbal abuse, improper use of no-knock warrants, inadequate 
investigation of misconduct allegations, entrapment and improper inducement of 
criminal activity, use of unreliable informants, and asset forfeiture laws. Guns 
seized by federal agents are rarely returned, even after a person is found not guilty. 
So far Clinton has not responded. Attorney Robert Sanders, the former head of 
criminal enforcement at the ATF, said: "Instead of focusing on selected criminals, 
there is an indiscriminate focus on anyone who owns guns." Some in the ATF 
consider Sanders a traitor which shows how dangerous the ATF is." 

Complaints against the ATF have continued for many years. After the 1968 
Gun Control Act was passed the ATF, which was given responsibility to enforce 
it, took aggressive action against gun owners partly because there was little need 



State and Federal Police 165 



to do its traditional work of stopping moonshining. The ATF used the vague lan- 
guage of the 1968 law to entrap and arrest many gun owners. In 1971 Ken Ballew 
suffered permanent brain damage and paralysis in one such raid. In July, 1995 he 
died from his injury. As it does today the ATF had focused on seizing guns not on 
stopping crime, and they harassed people who criticized them. The First Amend- 
ment may exist but so does the ATF, and one must be aware of this." In the early 
1980s Congress held hearings on the ATF. In January, 1982 the Senate Con- 
stitutional Rights Subcommittee report said "It is apparent that enforcement 
tactics made possible by current federal firearms laws are constitutionally, legally, 
and practically reprehensible...." ATF violations of the Second, Fourth, and Fifth 
Amendments were described. It said that about 75 percent of ATF gun prosecu- 
tions involved ordinary citizens with no criminal intent or knowledge, who were 
entrapped by technical violations. In some cases people were prosecuted for 
interpretations of the law which the ATF had not even published in the Federal 
Registrar. Someone was prosecuted for an act the AFT acting head said was 
perfectly legal. Misconduct by agents and supervisors was gathered, yet little 
changed as we see today. 

There are many reports that federal police, especially the ATF, are collecting 
records of who owns guns as a prelude to the registration and ultimate seizure of 
all guns. In the Fresno, California police department, an ATF agent used a com- 
puter to track firearms owners and fed that information into a national computer. 
During the militia hearings, Senator Spector openly asked for the names and 
addresses of militia members. Why does the government want such information? 
Are these people going to be arrested during a national emergency? The Feds are 
specifically raiding the headquarters of various organizations to collect names and 
addresses of members. 

Using a questionable search warrant federal police raided the national 
headquarters of the North American Freedom Council on October 19, 1994. Sim- 
ilar raids have taken place in numerous branches of this group which provides 
information on the IRS. Names and addresses are always seized." On November 
12, 1994 the FBI raided the home and headquarters of a national militia group, 
United States Special Field Forces (USSF) in Woodbridge, Virginia. The reason 
for the raid was that the back of an I.D. card said Property of United States Gov- 
ernment instead of Properly of United States Special Field Forces. The card 
correctly listed the name and address of the organization, and this improper identi- 
fication was not associated with any crime. Based on this error a warrant was 
obtained to search for USSF documents "of its members." In a free society making 
a slight error on an identification card would hardly justify raiding someone's 
home, especially with such a broadly based warrant. Everything concerning the 
USSF was seized. 

While there are many problems with the police, as the anger grows, we 
should remember that many police would be aghast at the new world order if they 
understood the planned dictatorship. Anger should be directed more to the behind- 
the-scenes corporate controllers than at government officials conveniently avail- 
able, who are usually merely carrying out order. There are many decent police who 
believe in the Constitution and who are extremely angry at the vast criminality 
taking place in Washington. Michael Levine, author and former decorated DEA 
agent, often receives calls from frustrated agents who describe phony busts and 
important drug cases cancelled by politicians. The author of The Clinton Chroni- 



166 Treason The New World Order 



cles receives many calls from frustrated federal authorities. The Michigan militia 
reportedly has established safe houses to protect people in government coming 
forward with information. 

In early 1995 an issue of The Agent, the magazine of treasury agents includ- 
ing the FBI, ATF, and IRS, criticized management problems in the treasury 
bureaucracy, and said senior officials in the ATF and FBI should be indicted over 
Waco. ABC's Day One on September 14, 1995 described an FBI sling operation of 
NASA that was stopped before senior officials could be arrested for corruption. 
Various FBI agents were very upset and one quit the bureau. In August, 1995 FBI 
agent Frederic Whitehurst said the famed FBI crime lab has been fabricating 
evidence for years in hundreds of cases to get convictions. Holding a doctorate in 
chemistry he has complained for years, but there was no publicity until his state- 
ments affected the World Trade Center and O.J. cases. Refusing to comply with 
false lab results, he was demoted and transferred." The Justice Department found 
serious problems with the FBI lab in the Ruby Ridge case; the FBI lab had 
authenticated Foster's suicide note which other experts have discounted. There have 
been five internal investigations against this whistleblower. 

When whistleblowers go to Congress, the press, or the Justice Department 
little occurs. Rodney Stich in Defrauding America named dozens of Americans, 
such as Gunther Russbacher and Michael Riconosciuto, who were killed or im- 
prisoned by the government when they tried to reveal government criminal 
activities. Not only are people murdered, but "It is standard practice for Justice 
Department prosecutors to silence or discredit whistleblowers and informants, 
especially intelligence agency personnel, by charging them with federal offenses 
for carrying out what they were ordered to do by their handlers." When someone 
becomes a threat the government will have them arrested on false charges, seize 
their assets, pay people to lie under oath against them, pressure and bribe judges, 
and have all evidence sealed because of national security, preventing public access 
to it." 

A typical example of how the FBI threatens agents who reveal corruption in- 
volves the 28 page confession of William R. Stringer in a deposition before a 
judge in 1994. Stringer had been an FBI agent in the South for many years and 
was 67 and dying when he gave the confession. He explained how the FBI planted 
evidence to set up Byron De La Beckwith to be jailed for a murder he never com- 
mitted. And on orders from the FBI the local police killed someone and accidently 
also killed a female FBI informant. Stringer first disclosed these activities to the 
Justice Department in 1976, when the Attorney General called for agents to step 
forward and reveal illegal activities. When the FBI learned of this they sent agents 
from Washington who threatened Stringer and warned him to retract his story. 
Even in the 1970s with the many hearings and investigations little really 
changed." The Jackson Advocate in its December 14-20, 1995 issue reported that, 
with this confession and new evidence uncovered by ex-judge W.O. Dillard, De La 
Beckwith may get a new trial. Dillard has filed a Friend of the Court petition to 
free Beckwith. 

In January, 1993 the Washington Post did a six part series on persecutory 
abuse. Evidence is withheld from the defense, grand juries are manipulated, and 
witnesses are intimidated. Federal agents who terrorize or kill citizens are never 
punished, as in the Waco, Randy Weaver, and Judi Ban cases. Over the years 
people like Rep. Brooks, Senator Moynihan, and Rep. Wise, Jr. tried to learn 



State and Federal Police 167 



what steps were being taken to correct such abuses, but the Justice Department re- 
fused to cooperate. This situation shows why there should be laws in place forcing 
government bureaucrats to provide information Congress requires. If an agency 
refuses to respond, give them seven days and then fire, fine, and arrest people in 
that department until the people's representatives can learn exactly what is going 
on. In a free society bureaucrats should not be allowed to withhold information 
from Congress. Of course one also needs representatives who will protect the peo- 
ple's rights. 

Another dangerous trend is the gradual federalization and militarization of state 
and local police into a unified national police force. The Founding Fathers warned 
against this. J. Edgar Hoover in 1964 opposed a national police force. Supreme 
Court Justice Robert H. Jackson said: "I cannot say that our country could have no 
central police without becoming totalitarian, but I can say with great conviction 
that it cannot become totalitarian without a centralized national police.... A na- 
tional police. ..will have enough on enough people, even if it does not elect to 
prosecute them, so that it will find no opposition to its policies." On June 16, 
1936 Hitler established a unified police force throughout Germany. 

Federal authorities are gaining control over state and local police through fed- 
eral funding, growth of federal law enforcement agencies, and more federal crimes. 
The Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEA A) was created by the 1968 
Omnibus Crime Control Act. A leader of LEAA, Clarence Coster, openly declared 
on March 3, 1971 that local police needed to be centralized to be governed better. 
This agency was abolished in 1981 because so many were against its programs. 

With unfunded mandates and limited ability to tax citizens because of the 
overwhelming federal tax authority, states and localities are now being economi- 
cally coerced to turn to federal authorities to financially support the police. State, 
local, and federal law authorities increasingly work together in multi-jurisdictional 
(MJTF) task forces conducting raids on people those in power deem to be a threat. 
The 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill established Rural Crime and Drug Task Forces in 
each federal judicial district to operate under the Attorney General. These federal 
rural task forces can work with local and state police to confiscate the property of 
citizens who are only under investigation. 

Federal agencies like the Justice Department, FBI, DEA, and ATF are in- 
creasingly fight local crime. The DEA's REDRUM program pairs DEA agents 
with local police in 21 cities to solve drug-inspired murders. The ATF has formed 
21 task forces to fight local crime. 40 While this enhances federal power, many 
experts feel that using federal agents to fight street crime is not very efficient. 

There is also increased involvement of the military in law enforcement as the 
Posse Comitatus Act is weakened. This act is supposed to keep the Army and Air 
Force out of civilian affairs. Congress has allowed the state National Guard to 
participate in drug operations, if the troops are only under the state government. 
Congress passed 32 USC 112 (1990 and 1991) to provide federal money for state 
National Guard drug fighting. 41 Congress and the courts, especially since the 
1980s, have increased military involvement in the war on drugs. In December, 
1994 the House Committee on Foreign Affairs held a hearing on international 
narcotics control in which it listed a series of laws that now allow the U.S. mili- 
tary to stop narcotics in the U.S. U.S. v. Bacon (1988), U.S. v. Brown (1980), 
People v. Wells (1985), and People v. Burder (1979) have damaged the intent of 
the Posse Comitatus Act to separate the military from civilian policing. 



168 Treason The New World Order 



During the Ruby Ridge hearings Senator Charles Grassley said "Law en- 
forcement now cross-trains with the military's elite special operations forces. The 
military mission — to kill first — may have rubbed off on law enforcement. ...The 
FBI must stop thinking its the military and get back to being the FBI." Military 
facilities are now used to train law enforcement officials. In 1993 Washington, 
D.C. had its recruits undergo training at the U.S. Marine Corps base in Quantico, 
Virginia. Military surveillance equipment and helicopters are used in local police 
operations. Black Helicopters Over America by Jim Keith describes the continu- 
ous use of helicopters to harass citizens. Sarah McClendon interviewed armed 
forces spokesman Harvey Perrett, III, who admitted a S3 billion program helps 
fund a black helicopter base in Fort Campbell, Kentucky. The military and Justice 
Department have formulated a plan "Operations Other Than War" to use non-lethal 
weapons against civilians. This will further involve the military in civilian affairs. 
Lt. General J.H. Binford Peay, III, in the Army publication Tomorrow's Missions, 
said the military should be prepared to assist in domestic peace-keeping missions 
including anti-drug programs. 4 ' 

Accompanying the growing federalization of crime is a massive increase in 
federal police agents. In 1967 the Federal Bureau of Narcotics had 300 agents. Re- 
cently the DEA, its replacement, had 3,400 agents. Federal police now make up 
10 percent of the nation's total police forces. There are now 53 federal agencies 
that allow agents to carry arms, and about 140 federal agencies enforce compliance 
with federal laws. 

Charles Meeks, executive director of the National Sheriffs Association said 
about increased federal intervention and influence over the local police: "By pass- 
ing statutes in an effort to make (the crime problem) better we're getting closer to 
a federal police state." In 1993 under the reinventing government program, the 
National Performance Review report recommended "the designation of the Attor- 
ney General as the Director of Law Enforcement to coordinate federal law enforce- 
ment efforts." This is one more sign of a unified national police force. 

There are many reports that federal agents have increased firepower. In May 
and August, 1994 the Georgia National Guard trained ATF members to use 
Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles. The September, 1993 issue of Handguns 
magazine said the EPA's Criminal Investigation Division (CID) has replaced re- 
volvers with Glock 19 semi-automatic pistols. An official said the CID "decided to 
re-evaluate its firearms policy as it reorganized to undertake its expanded respon- 
sibilities under the Pollution Prosecution Act." In one state federal forest service 
officials purchased over 30,000 rounds of .45 calibre ammunition. The Washing- 
ton Times reported on July 18, 1995, that the ATF had obtained 22 OV-10D 
aircraft. These planes were used by the Marines during the Vietnam War for gun- 
fire and missile support of ground troops. Who in America are the federal police 
going to war against? 

Groups targeted by the government, such as the Patriot movement and mili- 
tias, should carefully study books like War at Home by Brian Glick to understand 
the harassment tactics used against them. Glick described four levels of illegal 
government harassment: infiltration by agents and informers, psychological war- 
fare, harassment through the legal system, and extralegal force and violence, 
including murder. There may be intense surveillance, interviews to scare people 
into becoming informants, false arrests, political trials, or grand juries where you 



State and Federal Police 169 



can bejailed for refusing to cooperate. The Feds publicly attack a group, infiltrate 
it, and inspire it to commit violence to discredit the entire group. 

In the fall of 1994 the ATF's Intelligence Division sent a briefing paper to 
police departments across the nation with disinformation on the militias, and Janet 
Reno sent orders to 12 states to closely watch patriotic and militia groups, espe- 
cially the leaders. If someone in a militia group is especially keen on promoting 
actual violence, that person may be an undercover agent. Already John Parsons, 
head of the Tri-State's Militia, an important militia for communications, admitted 
under oath at a trial that he was taking S 1,775 weekly to report to the FBI and that 
he accepted $500 a week plus certain expenses to collect information for the FBI 
while on a trip to militia groups in New Mexico." This group sent a fax 
threatening a civil war if the antiterrorism bill was passed. In other words, a 
militia lead by an FBI operative threatened violence against the government. 44 The 
result is that the press has another reason to attack the supposed extremist views 
of the militia. An official in a Washington militia started advocating violence. 
That group had access to fingerprint records, and they learned he was a federal 
agent. He was thrown out and weeks later turned up in a Kentucky militia. 

The private security industry is another danger. It now employs over 2.5 
million people, and in 1992 $52 billion was spent on private security while $30 
billion was spent on the police. There are 1.5 million private security guards and 
only 554,000 state and local police. These private guards receive little training, 
and they participate in illegal activities such as union-busting and spying on 
people. Many criminals work in these agencies, and one guard made the FBI's 10 
most wanted list. Some of these private security agencies work for the secret gov- 
ernment. Often controlled by large corporations, this large security force could be 
used during a declared national emergency, although many of these people would 
not follow orders if they understood what was happening. The authorities feel it is 
safer to use private security companies, or foreign intelligence agencies such as 
from England, to commit illegal acts so the government has another level of deni- 
ability. This is one of the lessons from the 1970s congressional investigations." 

Fortune magazine presented a remarkable story of Allstate bringing in private 
investigators to harass its employees. 4 " The House Committee on Interior and In- 
sular Affairs said that after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, the oil industry hired 
Wackenhut, a large private security firm, to illegally spy on various people to 
identify whistleblowers. Targets of this campaign included Alaska state officials, 
and Rep. George Miller was almost added to the list. Wackenhut specializes in 
identifying whistleblowers and has long had a close relationship with the CIA and 
other federal police agencies. By 1966 Wackenhut had secret files on four million 
Americans, and it has branches in other countries. 4 ' The government supposedly 
needs a valid reason to spy on you, private corporations do not. 

All law enforcement officials should be required to study the Constitution and 
Bill of Rights and be tested on them at times. The best way to restore constitu- 
tional government in criminal matters is to follow the advice of the Founding 
Fathers — disband most federal police agencies and restore crime fighting to state 
and local police. All federal police who have committed illegal acts against 
American citizens should face criminal charges before new independent oversight 
agencies with permanent special prosecutors established to prosecute such abuses. 

A new code of honor in each agency should be established. In the military 
academies, if one learns of cheating by fellow cadets and doesn't report it, one may 



170 Treason The New World Order 



be expelled from the service. People in the military have an obligation to disobey 
unlawful orders. Why should we expect less from the police. If anyone in the po- 
lice agencies is given an order that clearly violates the Constitution or the agencies 
mandate, they should refuse to follow such illegal orders, without fear of reprisal, 
and be required to report illegal orders to new oversight agencies to resolve such 
issues. People issuing illegal orders should be punished. 

The rampant physical and verbal violence during police raids should be 
stopped. The Ku Klux Klan Act, forbidding the wearing of masks to terrorize the 
public, should be enforced to ban police from wearing masks. Increased use of 
volunteer police, as in the 1800s would lessen police criminality. Search warrants 
should be served within 30 days of being issued, and no hearsay or contradictory 
evidence should be used in issuing such warrants. Applications for a search warrant 
should include material on the reliability of witnesses." 

In 1924 Attorney General Harlan Stone, who appointed Hoover head of the 
FBI, warned "that a secret police may become a menace to free government and 
free institutions because it carries with it the possibility of abuses of power which 
are not always quickly apprehended or understood...." Today "An American police 
state has evolved, operating in the shadows side by side with the legitimate system 
of government... .We have created a uniquely American police state, one that has 
managed to grow and operate within, or at least alongside, the democratic system 
....It is unnerving to think that a kind of totalitarianism has taken root in Amer- 
ica, but if we shrink from recognizing it, we shall not remove it." 4 ' 

The Waco and Weaver massacres represent what the government may do in the 
future to seize guns. The Justice Department report on the Weaver raid shows that 
the government expected the assault "was not going to last long" because the 
Weavers would be "taken down hard and fast." These assaults were unique only in 
that so many died and there was so much publicity. Every year there are hundreds 
of improper raids, yet even when people are killed the police are rarely prosecuted. 
The Constitution is held in contempt and homes are assaulted with guns drawn, 
without warrants, and people and pets are often injured, tied up for hours, or killed 
while federal agents "protect the people." Yet the Washington crowd keeps 
wondering why people are increasingly angry at a tyrannical federal government 
when the economy is supposedly good. 

The government attacks at Waco and Randy Weaver's home awakened many 
Americans to how dangerous the federal government has become. Since no one in 
law enforcement was really punished for these crimes, it only encouraged further 
atrocities against the people as we saw in Oklahoma. The police are above the 
law. Judges who issues vague search warrants often without probable cause bear 
great responsibility for damaging the Bill of Rights. 

The FBI, CIA, and other organs of the secret government never stopped 
closely monitoring millions of Americans in the 1970s, because no one except 
Congress told them to stop. What was publicly proclaimed about respecting the 
rights of citizens were lies. I don't support left or right wing violence, but I also 
believe that people have a legal right to peaceful political dissent without the po- 
lice conducting criminal acts against them. The increasingly aggressive stance that 
the police take shows how they often do not serve or respect the people. The 
objective is to force people to follow harsh rules and to face the consequences, 
including deadly force, if there is resistance. 



171 



Chapter XIII 
Militias in American History 



"Whenever the militia comes to an end, or is despised or neglected, I shall consider 
this union dissolved, and the liberties of North America lost forever." 

President John Adams 

"No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the 
people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect 
themselves against tyranny in government." 

Thomas Jefferson 



Traditionally the militia was used to defend the state and to maintain law and 
order. It was the firm intention of the Founders to allow states to maintain mili- 
tias, partly to prevent tyranny and to protect the people's rights. The nature of the 
militia as a legal and political institution is at the heart of the role of the militia 
in our society. 

Belief in an armed militia was firmly rooted in the experiences and political 
writings of many prominent authorities for hundreds of years before the founding 
of the U.S. In The Art of War, Machiavelli stressed that citizens should be armed. 
"It is certain that no subjects or citizens, when legally armed and kept in due order 
by their masters, ever did the least mischief to any State. ...Rome remained free for 
400 years and Sparta for 800, although their citizens were armed all that time; but 
many other States that have been disarmed have lost their liberties in less than 40 
years." James Harrington said: "Men accustomed unto their arms and liberties will 
never endure the yoke" of tyranny. Montesquieu criticized an Italian state that 
banned its citizens from bearing arms. William Blackstone, in Commentaries, 
defended the right to bear arms for self-defense as an auxiliary right belonging to 
the individual. 5 The English Puritians were typical in believing that bearing arms 
symbolized their freedom. Every colony had militias. Militias were seen as pro- 
tecting the people against the excesses of British rule; indeed they played a role in 
several colonial revolts, such as in Virginia. The militia was described as a 
"school ofpolitical democracy.'" 

On March 23, 1775 the Continental Congress said: "That a well regulated 
Militia, composed of Gentlemen and Yeomen, is the natural strength and only se- 
curity of a free Government." While there was criticism of the untrained militia 
during the Revolutionary War, they played a key role in the ultimate victory. The 
spark that incited the Revolutionary War involved the British trying to seize 
arsenals used by the minutemen, local militia units. 

The excesses of British troops in America along with hundreds of years of 
similar experiences in England, had created a great fear of a standing army in the 
colonies. The view of many was expressed in the Virginia Declaration of Rights 



172 Treason The New World Order 



on June 12, 1776. "Standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dan- 
gerous to liberty...." Citizen militias were considered morally superior to regular 
standing armies. Anti-federalists attacked the new Constitution partly because 
standing armies would exist under the federal government. George Mason said: 
"When once a standing army is established in any country the people lose their 
liberty." 

After the revolution this view changed and many felt a limited standing army 
was essential. The British controlled Canada, the French were in the West, the 
Spanish ruled Florida, and the Indians were a constant problem. Many agreed that a 
standing army was a necessary evil to protect the country but that it must be small 
and carefully controlled. People's rights could be effectively protected by a repub- 
lican form of government that protected individual rights. 

People like Alexander Hamilton defended the Constitution in 1787 by saying: 
"Nor can tyranny be introduced into this country by arms. ...The spirit of the 
country with arms in their hands and disciplined as a militia, would render it 
impossible." The state militias and the people's right to bear arms would protect 
the rights of the people and prevent the federal government from becoming too 
oppressive. Hamilton also said: "The best we can hope for concerning the people 
at large is that they be properly armed." George Mason said: "To disarm the people 
is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." 

Patrick Henry said in 1787 during the Constitution debate: "The militia, sir, 
is our ultimate safety. We can have no security without it. ...My great objection to 
this Government is, that it does not leave us the means of defending our rights; or 
of waging war against tyrants." In 1788 Henry added: "The great object is that 
every man be armed." Henry was firmly against giving the federal government any 
control over state militias. James Madison said: "Americans need never fear their 
government because of the advantage of being armed, which Americans possess 
over the people of almost every other nation." Crime was another reason why 
many felt the people should bear arms. John Adams said: "Arms in the hands of 
individual citizens may be used at individual discretion. ..in private self defense." 

In 1789 the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, a prominent newspaper, said "As 
civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to 
tyrannize, and as the military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend 
our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the 
people are confirmed in their right to keep and bear their private arms." It was 
widely accepted in the early days of the Republic that all people had a right to bear 
arms, and this right was not limited to the militia or the common good. 4 The 
Founding Fathers would have been horrified at how the federal government has 
taken control of the state militias. 

Despite what is now sometimes falsely claimed in the heated gun control de- 
bate, a close review of original documents from the colonial period shows that no 
laws existed which prohibited free citizens from bearing arms. In every state the 
right of the individual to bear arms was accepted. "Legal articles and judicial opin- 
ions which deny that the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental, personal 
right have no historical foundation, but rather are based on bare assertion to reach a 
preconceived result.'" There was no serious dissent in adopting the Second 
Amendment." To the Founders there was a close relation between the militia and 
the right to keep and bear arms. The idea that the Second Amendment guaranteed 
only a collective, not an individual, right originated in the 20th century. 7 



Militias in American History 173 



Most state Constitutions recognized the right to maintain a militia and the 
right of its citizens to bear arms. The North Carolina Constitution, Article I, Sec- 
tion 30 states: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free 
State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...." The 
Founders were absolutely determined that the people could bear arms and the states 
would maintain their own militias, with little control by the federal government 
over these militias in order to prevent government tyranny. 

The militia clause in the Constitution was of great concern to the anti- 
federalists because they felt greater federal control over the state militias would 
develop, so the Militia Act of 1792 became law. It was renewed in 1795, with 
some changes in 1807. The states were exclusively responsible for training and 
maintaining their militias. The federal government couldn't even offer advise. 
Except when in federal service, the militia was to be governed by the states. 

During the War of 1812 New York, Massachusetts, and Connecticut refused 
to provide its militias to invade Canada. While a state court supported this posi- 
tion, the Supreme Court in Martin v. Molt (1827) ruled that the states should 
support the president as Commander-in-Chief. Except in a few large cities, there 
were rarely full-time police officers, so the militia was used at times to assist the 
sheriff. As Tocqueville said, the entire community often helped catch a criminal. 
We see a vestige of this today in the movies, when a posse of townspeople gather 
to catch a criminal. 

In 1833 Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote, in his famous book 
Commentaries on the Constitution: "The right of the citizens to keep and bear 
arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a Republic; 
since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary powers of 
rulers and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable 
the people to resist and triumph over them."" Even after the Civil War this was a 
common view. In 1894 Charles E. Stevens said, in Sources of the Constitution of 
the United States, the right to bear arms is "a right involving the latent power of 
resistance to tyrannical government.'" 

In 1861 the Militia Act of 1792 was further changed to make it easier to use 
federal troops to enforce federal edicts. Troops could now be used in their regular 
military capacity to resolve local issues. Before this time, troops were used like a 
posse with "the powers vested in the marshals." Troops were henceforth used like 
civilians under federal marshals. Of greater importance, federal troops could now be 
used by the president whenever it became impractical to enforce federal laws 
through normal judicial proceedings. Previously, under the 1792 Militia Act, 
military force was restricted to situations where resistance was "too powerful to be 
suppressed" by civilian authority. This act today stands as Title 10 U.S.C. 332. 
Engdahl said this broad authority has never been contested, but it could not survive 
a legal challenge." 

The Act of 1871 was even more extreme and may also be found unconstitu- 
tional if challenged. In this case, no distinction was made between "insurrection" 
and "violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy." In any of these situations 
military intervention was acceptable, and now military force could be used before 
civilian enforcement of federal laws had been exhausted. This law is now 10 
U.S.C. 333, and was used to justify federal use of force in the racial and urban 
disturbances of the 1960s. 



174 Treason The New World Order 



After the Civil War many people criticized the domestic utilization of federal 
troops, especially with the continued federal occupation of the South. In 1878 the 
Posse Comitatus Act was passed as a rider to an Army appropriation bill and is 
today 18 U.S.C. 1385. It states that except, when authorized by Congress or the 
Constitution, the Army — with the Air Force later added — cannot be used as a 
posse comitatus to execute the laws. This law blocks U.S. marshals from using 
federal troops as a posse to enforce federal laws. Violation of this law calls for a 
fine of up to $10,000 and up to two years imprisonment. Because of congressional 
tactics used to pass this law, the Navy and Marines are not officially limited under 
this act, and there have been instances in the war on drugs when Navy personnel 
have been used domestically. Some feel our Navy functions under admiralty law." 
During the Spanish-American War, a state militia wouldn't fight in Cuba, 
believing the federal government didn't have the right to order it overseas. Some 
states believed that being sent overseas did not involve suppressing insurrections 
or repelling invasions, as described in the Constitution under Article I, Section 8, 
Clause 15. 

After 1900 Congress and the courts greatly weakened the rights of the states 
and the people to maintain control over an armed militia. In 1901 the Army Reor- 
ganization Act reorganized the militia and enhanced the process of federalizing state 
militias. In the Dick Act of 1903 training by regular Army officers at regular 
Army schools with federal funding was introduced. In addition, the Militia Act of 
1792 was repealed, and the militias were divided into the more professional 
National Guard and the "Reserve Militia," or unenrolled militia. From 1792 to 
1903 states controlled the militias in peace, and there was dual state and federal 
control during war. After 1903 the militia was under dual control in peace and 
under federal control during a war. Gradually there were no limits to how long the 
National Guard could be federalized, and the guard could be sent anywhere in the 
U.S. or overseas. With the National Defense Act of 1916 each member of the 
National Guard took an oath of allegiance to the federal government as well as to 
his state. Members of the National Guard could be drafted into the federal military 
when needed. Under Roosevelt's emergency rule, the 1933 National Defense Act 
Amendments created the National Guard of the United States with dual enlistment 
in the state and federal National Guards. National Guard units were considered a 
reserve of the active military. 

Before World War I federal courts rarely ruled on state militias, while the state 
courts issued some rulings that usually supported the right to bear arms and the 
right for the states to maintain a militia. In State v. Kerner (1921) the North 
Carolina Supreme Court said that the right to bear arms was "a sacred right based 
upon the experience of the ages in order that people may be accustomed to bear 
arms and be ready to use them for protection of their liberties or their country 
when occasion serves." 

In the 1920s and 1930s Congress and the courts look steps to control the 
private ownership of certain guns to prevent criminal activity. U.S. v. Warin 
(1976) is especially interesting. Warin claimed that the Second Amendment should 
protect him from taxation because that interfered with his right to bear arms. The 
court rejected this position and said that only the preferred First Amendment rights 
were protected against license or taxes. This is a very important point that is rarely 
discussed. Today the government is increasing taxes in various areas of arms 
possession to limit the peoples right to possess arms. Ultimately an increasingly 



Militias in American History 175 



oppressive government could impose prohibitively expensive taxes on all our 
rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, so that these rights would become unus- 
able. Government should not be allowed to impose a tax or fee on any of our 
rights. When this principle is violated with one right, as with the Second 
Amendment, all our rights are threatened. 

In 1986 Maine refused to send its National Guard to an exercise in Honduras. 
In response. Congress passed the Montgomery Amendment, which removed a 
governor's right to refuse to allow the National Guard to be called up for training 
because of objections to location, purpose, schedule, or type of training. When 
Massachusetts and Minnesota separately challenged the constitutionality of this 
new law, lower federal courts supported the federal government, as did the Supreme 
Court. Initially the Eighth Circuit of Appeals found that the militia clause of the 
Constitution preserved state authority over the National Guard unless "there was 
some sort of exigency or extraordinary need to exert federal power." However, this 
court overturned itself. In the Massachusetts case, the lower court said: "The dual 
enlistment system makes the militia dependent upon Congress for its existence 
because, in a practical sense at least, the militia exists only when Congress does 
not want or need it as part of the army." 

"The nation has completed a cycle, moving from a wholly state controlled 
militia system to a militia that, for all intents and purposes, belongs to the federal 
government, and is under its orders, whenever and however the national gov- 
ernment wills and legislates."" Once again Congress and the courts have gone 
radically against the will of the Founders. State control over the militia, as desired 
by the Founders, has been greatly weakened while federal control has increased. 
Although normally the National Guard reports to the state governors, in wartime, 
resistance to federal law and federal court orders, or any declared emergency they are 
under the Defense Department and the president. Yet the Founding Fathers estab- 
lished the state militias, now the National Guard, to be independent military forces 
as a protection against government tyranny. Moreover, the militia was considered 
to include all citizens. Today, the National Guard is a select group separate from 
the people. 

While the federalists and anti-federalist had different views as to the role of a 
standing army and state militias, none of them wanted the federal government to 
completely dominate state militias, as is now the case. That the states would con- 
trol their own militias was understood to be one more protection against future 
government tyranny. The anti-federalists were quite right to be concerned that the 
Constitution gave the federal government loo much power. If state sovereignty is 
to be restored, the original state control of the militias must be restored and federal 
authority over these units must end, except during serious foreign threats. 

A good solution would be for the states to take back full control and training 
of the National Guard, establishing regional centers to provide professional train- 
ing at lower costs. Equipment from the federal government could be loaned to 
these regional centers to help maintain training standards. These activities would 
be completely outside the control of the federal government unless there was a 
national emergency. There should be no National Guard of the United States, and 
members of the guard should only lake an oath of office to their states according to 
the intentions of the Founders. Fortunately, while the National Guard is now 
dominated by the federal government, this is not true with the unenrolled militia. 



176 Treason The New World Order 



An excellent recent book that explains the role of militias in American history is 
Safeguarding Liberty; The Constitution & Citizen Militias, edited by Larry Pratt. 



177 



Chapter XIV 

Our Hidden Past: 
History of Martial Law in the U.S. 



"I have no reason to suppose, that he, who would take away my Liberty, would 
not when he had me in his Power, take away every thing else." 

John Locke 

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious but it cannot survive 
treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known 
and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the 
gate freely." 

Cicero 



Martial law was declared in the U.S. 30 times between 1789 and 1975. When 
I scanned hundreds of American history books there was barely a mention of this 
fact. It is as if the slate has been wiped clean, although when one checks computer 
on-line services, it is possible to find some articles and books on the subject as 
suggested by the notes in this chapter. In the law journals there are also articles on 
martial law in the U.S., although this discussion has decreased in recent years. 

Historically, there has been some confusion about the meaning of the term 
martial law. 1 Martial law is not military rule, which is the rule of a victorious 
army in an occupied country. Martial law is the use of military forces to control 
areas where civilian authorities have lost partial or full control, and there is a 
suppression of some civil agencies. 5 Nationally only the president should declare 
martial law, while most authorities agree that governors may declare martial law 
within their states. Our Constitution limits broad use of emergency powers or the 
suspension of constitutional protections even in emergencies. 1 

Usually only part of a state, such as a city, is placed under martial law. There 
have been times when troops were used to aid civilian authorities without martial 
law being declared. This was done partly for political reasons such as during the 
1967 Detroit riots. Martial law has also been declared after natural disasters such as 
in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania in June, 1972 after a flood following Hurricane 
Agnes. 

During the War of 1812 Andrew Jackson declared martial law in New Orleans 
on December 18, 1814. After the British were defeated, martial law remained in 
effect despite the growing anger of local citizens until March 13, 1815, when the 
war ended. 4 In 1842 martial law was declared in Rhode Island during the Dorrs 
Rebellion. There was a popular movement involving a people's convention in 
1841 which elected Thomas Dorr as governor. The incumbent governor called this 
an insurrection, imposed martial law, and called out the militia. 



178 Treason The New World Order 



There was a broad repression of dissent during the Civil War. Lincoln with- 
drew the use of the mail for various newspapers that criticized the war. In the 
1860s this meant that a newspaper couldn't survive. Prominent newspapers, like 
the Journal of Commerce and the Daily News in New York, were suppressed with 
U.S. marshals ordered to seize certain newspapers. Most newspapers reversed their 
policies and stopped criticizing the war or supported it. 

Lincoln also suspended the writ of habeas corpus without congressional 
approval. On April 27, 1861 Lincoln called on the commanding general of the 
army to suspend the writ of habeas corpus on the rail corridor between Philadel- 
phia and Washington, D.C. Later, this was extended to the rail corridor between 
Philadelphia and Maine, all of Kentucky, Maryland, and St. Louis.' Military 
authorities usually refused to free people who had been arrested when shown a writ 
of habeas corpus stating that no civilian court had authority over prisoners of war. 
When Congress asked for information about the arrests, Lincoln said it was not in 
the public interest to furnish the information. Constitutional safeguards to protect 
individual liberties were ignored. 

Lincoln also sent troops into war without a congressional declaration of war 
saying it was a domestic insurrection so no congressional authority was necessary. 
While Lincoln saved the Union, the general public and many historians have 
largely forgotten or have forgiven his repressive measures. A more balanced ap- 
proach to his presidency would bring more criticism of his emergency actions that 
were often not necessary or legal under the Constitution. 

In Ex parte Milligan (1866) the Supreme Court held that in the absence of 
actual invasion, martial law and the military trial of civilians was illegal while 
civil processes were unobstructed and the courts in session. "The Constitution of 
the U.S. is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers 
with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all cir- 
cumstances. ...Martial law cannot arise from a threatened invasion. The necessity 
must be actual and present; the invasion real, such as effectually closes the courts 
and deposes the civil administration." However, the Supreme Court did not ques- 
tion the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus during the war or the arrest of 
civilians without charge. 

Similar activities were executed in the South, but Jefferson Davis never de- 
clared martial law or suspended the writ of habeas corpus without his legislature's 
consent. Davis was less assertive of executive authority than Lincoln, and when he 
did exercise this power it was less obviously political and the order was less 
sweeping. Davis declared martial law in Norfolk and Portsmouth, Virginia on 
February 27, 1862. Three days later this was expanded to Richmond. Later martial 
law was declared by Davis or local military commanders in other parts of Virginia, 
east Tennessee, Memphis, Mobile, New Orleans, Atlanta, Salisbury, N.C., all of 
Texas and Arkansas, and parts of Louisiana and Mississippi." 

The North was especially aggressive in controlling the border states. On 
August 30, 1861 General Fremont declared martial law throughout Missouri.' 
Governor Morton declared martial law and acted with virtual dictatorship powers in 
Indiana between 1863 and 1865, after the Democratic-controlled state legislature 
refused to enact war measures." 

On September 24, 1862 Lincoln declared martial law and suspended the writ 
of habeas corpus throughout the nation. While the exact geographical territory of 
this proclamation was not outlined "the categories of offenses were vague enough, 



Our Hidden Past: History of Martial Law in the U.S. 179 



No. 51. 
Dec. 1,1865. BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: 



Preamble- 

A PROCLAMATION. 

Whereas, by the Proclamation of the President of the United States, of the 
fifteenth day of September, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, the 
Anit, p. 73-1. privilege of the writ of habeas corpus was, in certain cases therein set forth, sus- 
pended throughout tho United States; 

And whereas the reasons for that suspension may be regarded as having 

ceased in some of the states and territories : 

Suspension of Now therefore be it known, that I, Andrew Johnson, President of the 

iho writ of habeas United States, do hereby proclaim and declare, that tho suspension aforesaid 

vo^ei' mirii'a am ' a " ot ' ler proclamations and ordere suspending the privilege of the writ of 

certain states and l iaDen3 corpus in the states and territories of the United States, are revoked and 

territories, and annulled, excepting as to tho States of Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, North 

tlie District of Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, 

Colombia. Arkansas, and Texas, tho District of Columbia, and the Territories of New 

Mexico and Arizona. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the 
United States to bo affixed. 

Done at the city of Washington, this first day of December, in the year 
[l. fl.] of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-live, and of the 
Independence of the United States of America the ninetieth. 

ANDREW JOHNSON. 
By the President : 

William H. Seward, Secretary of Stale. 



in effect, to have placed the whole of the U.S. under martial law.'" Later use of 
this proclamation confirms this. Throughout the North upwards of 38,000 people 
were arrested for treason and helping the enemy. People who discouraged enlist- 
ments or engaged in disloyal practices were arrested. 

On December 1, 1865 President Andrew Johnson issued Proclamation number 
51 ending the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus except in certain southern 
states, the District of Columbia, and the territories of New Mexico and Arizona. 
This proclamation did not even discuss martial law, and restoring the writ of 
habeas corpus did not end martial law. In the law libraries there are several systems 
and databases whereby you can check to see what changes took place over the years 
with various government edicts. There is no evidence that Lincoln's proclamation 
of martial law was ever lifted. 

Charles Fairman said, in The Law of Martial Law, while there is a close 
relation between martial law and the writ of habeas corpus, there are also im- 
portant differences. 10 Professor Joel Parker of Harvard Law School said: "The 
existence of martial law and the suspension of the habeas corpus have been said to 



180 Treason The New World Order 



be one and the same thing; but in fact the former includes the latter and much 
more." James G. Randall said regarding the actions of the government during the 
Civil War: "The suspension of the habeas corpus privilege did not, of itself, 
institute martial law." 11 Under martial law the loss of many rights such as as- 
sembly, curfew, and search and seizure of weapons typically takes place. These 
activities do not automatically have any relationship to the writ of habeas corpus. 
Suspension of habeas corpus during martial law may take place, but this is not 
automatic and loss of this right is but one manifestation of martial law. In 
addition, when the writ of habeas corpus is suspended this does not necessarily 
mean that martial law is established. The civil courts may still be in operation. 
There have, in fact, been instances when martial law was declared and upheld by 
the courts with habeas corpus not suspended. 

Black's Law Dictionary clearly defines differences between habeas corpus and 
martial law. 15 It is unlikely that people would have just forgotten to remove the 
martial law that Lincoln established. I hope some group will take legal action to 
end the martial law of the Civil War, and people should demand action by 
Congress. If martial law from the Civil War is still in place, as appears to be the 
case, this is a dagger pointing at the heart of the people. People should not be 
fooled into thinking that the continued existence of martial law could not be used 
to violate the Constitution. Hitler was not alone in using existing laws to seize 
power. The continued state of martial law in the U.S. from the Civil War is one 
more tool the secret government could use to control the government, especially 
in a fabricated emergency. 

The Feed and Forage Act of 1861, a Civil War emergency act, allowed the 
cavalry to purchase feed for its horses when Congress wasn't in session. This act 
was used during the Vietnam War to spend millions of dollars without congres- 
sional approval. An emergency law passed over 100 years ago was used to get 
around congressional spending authority. Here we see the dangers of emergency 
powers becoming law and remaining in place indefinitely. 

Common use of the U.S. flag with yellow fringe around it in the courts is 
another sign that the U.S. is still under martial law. Such a (lag is historically 
used by military troops. Army regulations 260-10 and 840-10 provide for using 
this flag. In a March 28, 1924 circular the Army Adjutant General said: "Ancient 
custom sanctions the use of fringe on the regimental colors and standards, but 
there seems to be no good reason or precedent for its use on other flags." Under 4 
USC 1, the U.S. flag should include 13 horizontal stripes, alternating red and 
white with 50 white stars on a blue field. In State of Minnesota v. Randolph C. 
Miller (1995) when Miller filed a motion to replace the unconstitutional yellow- 
fringed U.S. flag the judge did this. Miller said this flag "signifies that tribunals 
conducted under such standards are under military law, and that the Constitution is 
suspended." 

After the Civil War martial law was used fairly often especially in the West, 
including in parts of Idaho (1899), Pennsylvania (1902), and Colorado (1903- 
1904). Many of these situations involved labor and mining conflicts. Fairman said 
in the West "martial law has been proclaimed on so many occasions as to have 
become a household word."" 

Martial law was declared by state governors for political purposes in 
Oklahoma (1935), South Carolina (1935), Arizona (1935), Rhode Island (1937), 
Tennessee (1939), and Georgia (1940). This was done based on Moyer v. Peabody 



Our Hidden Past: History of Martial Law in the U.S. 181 



(1909) when the Supreme Court strongly supported the governors' right to declare 
martial law and limited the courts' right to challenge state governors. Rhode Island 
used martial law to stop horse racing. The governors often mobilized the National 
Guard although there was no violence or threat of violence. Weiner called these 
cases bogus martial law situations. 14 In Sterling v. Constantin (1932) the 
Supreme Court curbed the excessive use of martial law by state governors, limit- 
ing the application of Moyer v. Peabody, stating that governors could only declare 
martial law when there was actual violence. The Supreme Court also reaffirmed 
the Milligan rule that courts have the power to review martial law declarations. 

Immediately after Pearl Harbor was attacked, the governor of Hawaii declared 
martial law, suspended the writ of habeas corpus, closed the civilian courts and in- 
vited the military authorities to lake command, which they did. That was declared 
unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Duncan v. Kahanamo Ku (1946). Here 
the court went beyond upholding the doctrine of judicial review for martial law and 
declared military trials of nonmilitary personnel as unlawful. Also, the court said 
the governor did not have the authority to close the civilian courts. 

Martial law was declared 10 times between 1945 and 1969. Its most promi- 
nent use was to protect the civil rights of black Americans as in Little Rock, 
Arkansas (1957), Oxford, Mississippi (1962), and Selma, Alabama (1965). Often 
the state National Guard was federalized to enforce federal court orders. In 1968 
martial law was also used to disperse marchers in Washington, D.C. Many were 
arrested, The courts ordered the government to pay large fines for this misuse of 
authority. 

Some legal authorities have called for more carefully drafted emergency power 
legislation to protect people's civil rights." While the courts have said that 
martial law can be declared during an emergency, exactly what would be an 
"emergency" and what steps can be taken have never been fully defined by the 
courts." Present laws and cases concerning emergency executive powers do not 
provide the executive with standards to examine the legality of establishing martial 
law in domestic violence. 

There are many other topics that can be discussed regarding martial law, but 
that would go beyond the scope of this book. An excellent booklet, published in 
1982, is The Use of Troops in Civil Disturbances in the United States, by A. 
Kenneth Pye. This 42 page booklet has 154 footnotes which review the many 
debates and ramifications of martial law, as well as the important law journal 
articles and books on this topic up to 1982. Little has been published on this 
topic since then. 



183 



Chapter XV 
Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 



"The essence of government is power, and power, lodged as it must be in human 
hands, will ever be liable to abuse." 

James Madison 

"Government is not reason; it's not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, it's a 
dangerous servant and a fearful master." 

George Washington 



The objective observer will appreciate that, if there are plans to establish 
martial law in the U.S., some preliminary work must be done to prepare for this. 
A few people cannot do the work and then expect thousands of people in law 
enforcement to carry out the plans. Certain people in government must learn 
something about these plans in advance, if these activities are ultimately to be 
activated. With the democratic traditions of our country there are many people in 
the government who do stand by the Constitution. It only takes a handful of such 
people to become horrified by these plans when they learn of them. This is partly 
why various plans for martial law in America have been leaked over the years. 

According to documents released by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 
martial law could be established during peace if there was "a complete breakdown 
in the exercise of government functions by local civilian authorities," reported the 
Defense Department. In 1971 David Packard, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, 
prepared a document "Employment of Military Resources in the Event of Civil 
Disturbances" that justified military control similar to martial law. This directive 
claims that Congress intended that there be two exceptions to the Posse Comitatus 
Act, which bars the Army and Air Force from engaging in domestic law enforce- 
ment. The exceptions are to restore public order when sudden and unexpected civil 
disturbances endanger life and property, disrupt normal governmental functions, 
and local officials cannot control the situation. Second, the military would step in 
when there is a need to protect federal property and federal government functions. 
Such loopholes make a farce of the Posse Comitatus Act. It was also claimed that 
for the military to step in a Presidential Executive Order would normally be 
needed, but this could be waived with "cases of sudden and unexpected emergencies 
which require that immediate military action be taken." 

In September, 1975 the Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights was 
told by the director of the Federal Preparedness Agency (FPA), predecessor to the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), that he couldn't tell them about 
the activities at Mount Weather or any similar command/relocation centers. 
Congress didn't have a right to this information. The Progressive said this is "an 
actual government-in-waiting," and there were about 100 similar centers in the 



184 Treason The New World Order 



1970s. 5 Mount Weather was established as the backup capital of the shadow gov- 
ernment ready to take control in an emergency. Various federal agencies are 
represented here. In June, 1975 Senator John Tunney said the base held dossiers on 
at least 100,000 Americans and it was "out of control." The base reportedly has 
broad surveillance facilities in place. Senator James Abourezk said the entire 
operation lacked supervision from the courts or Congress, and there was no public 
mandate or charter for this base to operate under. 

This emergency government was prepared to take over during the Vietnam 
War disturbances. Its internal reports recognize that during political unrest it may 
need to step in. This facility even published its own reports and recommendations 
on various national issues. In 1969 Nixon signed Executive Order (EO) 11490 
allowing Mount Weather and the FPA to take over the country when the president 
proclaimed a national emergency. Exactly what such a national emergency would 
be is not defined, which is part of the danger. This EO was amended in 1979 to 
reflect the creation of FEMA. Little has changed today except that these secret 
bases are now part of FEMA. 

In 1981 FEMA drafted emergency legislation called the Defense Resources 
Act, which was given to Congress in 1983. This act empowered FEMA to censor 
international communications, limit employment in areas of the national interest, 
condemn or seize property, and require loyalty oaths. 1 In a 1981 Defense Directive, 
Deputy Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci said martial law would probably be 
declared by the president, but senior military commanders also have the power to 
invoke it in the absence of a presidential order. 4 

FEMA continues to gather data from other intelligence agencies and monitor 
political dissent, because peaceful protesters are considered potential terrorists. In 
1983 the Senate Intelligence Committee heard that FEMA was conducting dom- 
estic intelligence operations but this was denied. However, FEMA has monitored 
the activities of many political groups, such as the Livermore Action Group in 
California.' In October, 1984 columnist Jack Anderson said FEMA had "standby 
legislation" that in a national emergency would "suspend the Constitution and the 
Bill of Rights, effectively eliminate private property, abolish free enterprise, and 
generally clamp Americans in a totalitarian vise." 

Martial law might be declared during a nuclear emergency. On June 16, 1955 
during exercise "Operation Alert 1955" President Eisenhower appears to have 
declared limited martial law. This exercise presupposed that the U.S. had been 
attacked by nuclear weapons. Hearings on this exercise were held by a House Sub- 
committee, although few people were aware of this. Reportedly "Unless the role 
and responsibility of State and local governments in both preattack and postattack 
civil defense functions is made clear.. .the entire burden of civil defense threatens to 
devolve by default to the Federal Government." In 1956 General Maxwell D. 
Taylor, Army Chief of Staff, told Congress the Army was ready to take control 
during an atomic attack if the president declared martial law, but "it has very little 
enthusiasm" for such a role.' 

The Bay Area Lawyers Alliance for Nuclear Arms Control sued FEMA in the 
early 1980s to obtain plans concerning martial law and the government's response 
to nuclear war. One FEMA document titled "Martial Law" obtained through the 
FOIA described martial law as the suspension of "all prior existing laws, func- 
tions, systems and programs of civil government." There were no plans for lifting 
martial law once it was established. According to released documents FEMA has 



Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 185 



22 secret EOs that the president may approve during a nuclear war. In addition, the 
National Security Council and the Emergency Mobilization Preparedness Board 
have many secret documents regarding how to respond to national emergencies. 
FEMA said many documents couldn't be released because of national security.' 
The public has no say in these matters. 

In Blank Check, Tim Weiner said in DEFCON 1, the highest state of military 
alert when nuclear war is imminent or may have already begun, the nation is 
automatically placed under martial law." Normally, U.S. forces are at DEFCON 4 
or 5. Obviously nuclear war and modern warfare are extremely serious and require a 
rapid response, but the declaration of martial law in a high state of military alert 
perhaps without even a nuclear war actually starting has never been discussed 
openly in Congress, much less in the press so the people can reflect on these 
issues. Instead secret plans are made, and false excuses can be used to declare a 
national emergency and martial law, which could then be used as an excuse to 
disarm the people. In DEFCON 1 it would be difficult for soldiers and the people 
to start raising questions. Bruce G. Blair said in certain cases, local commanders 
have "independent authority" to take steps associated with DEFCON 1, 2 or 3 
without first consulting the Joint Chiefs." 

Certain officials of the Reagan White House from the start of that regime ran 
a parallel secret government beyond the control or even knowledge of cabinet offi- 
cials and federal agencies." While some of these activities were discussed during 
the Iran-contra hearings, the activities of this secret government extended well 
beyond that arms deal. During the Iran-contra hearings, the head counsel for the 
Senate investigating commitiee, Arthur Liman, said there was a "secret govern- 
ment within a government." According to the Miami Herald, Oliver North and the 
National Security Council worked closely with FEMA to promote the secret 
government. 11 William Casey, head of the CIA, also conducted covert operations 
without proper congressional oversight. 

In 1984 Knight Rider, a prominent news service, published information about 
RX 84, a plot to suspend the Constitution and put over 100,000 illegal immi- 
grants and political prisoners into concentration camps. Some reports said over 
400,000 people were going to be arrested with martial law declared during a 
national emergency which was not even clearly defined but which supposedly 
could include arresting dissidents during widespread political protests, nuclear war, 
or a foreign invasion. During this period the U.S. considered invading Nicaragua 
and there was concern about how people would react. The Miami Herald said the 
plot called for FEMA to take control of the nation and for military commanders to 
control state and local governments during a national emergency. According to 
papers obtained from the FOIA, FEMA conducted training exercise REX Alpha 84 
and Night Train 84 on April 5-13, 1984, which called for detaining illegal aliens 
in military camps. President Reagan approved this exercise by signing National 
Security Decision Directive 52. The Miami Herald obtained a FEMA memo de- 
scribing the exercise, which stated that the Alpha Two part of the exercise called 
for activating "emergency legislation, assumption of emergency powers...." 
Exactly what this emergency legislation is remains a secret. 

According to congressional sources, the plot to declare martial law was part of 
a secret EO prepared by Reagan in May, 1984, that would be used during an emer- 
gency. Authority to declare martial law was also based on the Defense Resources 
Act which was to serve as standby legislation during a national emergency. If 



186 Treason The New World Order 



enacted this act would give a president broad powers equivalent to martial law." In 
September, 1984 the Washington Post said Attorney General William French, in 
an August 2 letter to presidential aide Robert McFarlane, accused FEMA of trying 
to so increase its power that it would be an "emergency czar.'"' Perhaps French 
was also concerned about the plans for martial law. 

The martial law part of the plot was described in a June 30, 1982 letter by 
John Brinkerhoff, a deputy to Louis O. Giuffrida, the director of FEMA under 
Reagan (1981-1985). The Miami Herald obtained a copy of this letter. The memo 
said that martial law means the suspension of all prior existing laws." Louis O. 
Giuffrida had in 1970 prepared plans to place black radicals in detention camps." 
He called for martial law if there was a national uprising of black militants with at 
least 21 million "American Negroes" being placed in "assembly centers or reloca- 
tion camps." 

We should all reflect on the number 21 million. Whenever a dictatorship is 
established, there are always various factions, and one can never be certain in 
advance exactly who will gain the upper hand. There are few blacks in the ruling 
elite, and it is very chilling that a fanatic like Giuffrida was placed in charge of 
FEMA, which would control the government during a national emergency. With 
the ruling elite having concluded that the world population must be radically di- 
minished for life to survive on this planet, what would happen to many minorities 
if the one world dictatorship took hold? 

In 1967 a novel The Man Who Cried I Am, was written by John Williams. 
The protagonist in the book discovered the King Alfred Plan which called for the 
arrest and extermination of all American blacks in a national emergency. Remem- 
ber this was during many civil rights riots. Reportedly, Williams considered the 
plan real but could only get it published in a novel. As typically happens when- 
ever horrific secret plans are released, many sources claimed they are false. 
Objectively there is no definite proof as to the validity or falsity of this plan. An 
almost identical version of this plan was leaked to various researchers after the 
book came out and a reliable source told Mac Brussel the plan was real. A plan by 
this name was in an Ohio prison system computer, and Dave Emory also believes 
this plan is probably true. 

During the Iran-contra hearings, Oliver North was asked by Rep. Jack Brooks 
about plans for FEMA to suspend the Constitution and establish martial law. 
Senator Inouye, chairman of the Senate Iran-contra Committee quickly intervened, 
so North didn't have to publicly respond. What could be a worse threat to the sur- 
vival of the Republic than to suppress information about a plot to remove the 
Constitution and establish a dictatorship. If ever there was news that should have 
been heard this was it. No one in government would investigate this plot and only 
a few in the press would even discuss it. Senator Inouye said this was "a secret 
government — a shadow government. ..(with) its own fund-raising mechanism, and 
the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest, free from all checks and 
balances and free from the law itself." Yet he refused to heed his own warning. 

After this discussion Rep. Gonzalez gave an interview in which he said: 
"Tragically Rep. Brooks had been stopped by the chairman (Inouye). The truth of 
the matter is that you do have those standby provisions, and the statutory emer- 
gency plans are there whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism, 
apprehend, invoke the military, and arrest Americans and hold them in detention 
camps." The historian, Theodore Draper, said about the Iran-contra hearings: "If 



Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 187 



ever the constitutional democracy of the U.S. is overthrown, we now have a better 
idea of how this is likely to be done." People in the Patriot movement and mili- 
tias understand this. 

Much about FEMA remains secret. Even directors of FEMA aren't told about 
certain classified programs. Under Bush, when the House wanted to learn how 
certain FEMA funds were being spent, the director admitted he didn't know, and 
when Congress pushed the issue the political leadership declared national security 
and the budget was passed. It is remarkable how these two words keep Congress 
from fulfilling its constitutional duties." According to one congressional report 
only 10 percent of FEMA employees are involved in disaster relief. 

Several years ago, FEMA did such a poor job during many natural disasters 
because it exists to monitor people not to help during emergencies. For years 
FEMA refused to take some of its sophisticated communications equipment to 
disaster relief areas to keep its assets secret. According to the National Academy of 
Public Administration, 27 percent ($100 million) of FEMA's 1993 budget, with- 
out including the disaster-relief fund, went into a secret "black budget." On 
September 6, 1994 Clinton appointed George J. Opfer, a 25-year veteran of the 
Secret Service, inspector general of FEMA. If FEMA's main purpose is to assist 
in natural disasters, why is he from law enforcement? Clinton appointed James 
Witt as head of FEMA. He is described as the first head of FEMA with emergency 
management experience. Why is this the case if FEMA's main goal is to provide 
emergency relief? 

In 1984 Secretary of State George Shultz lobbied vigorously for a preemptive 
strikes bill that would give him authority to list "known and suspected terrorists" 
within the U.S., who could be attacked and killed by government agents with 
impunity. Shultz admitted in a public address on October 25, 1984 that the strikes 
would take place based on information that would never stand up in court, and that 
innocent people would be killed in the process. He insisted, however, that people 
listed would not be permitted to sue in court to have their names taken off that 
list. Attorney General Meese said arrested people would be considered guilty until 
proven otherwise." The New York Times said this bill was identical to Hitler's 
"Night and Fog" program. 

In 1985 and 1987 the San Francisco Bay Guardian described the "Garden 
Plot," a secret plan developed in the 1960s to suspend the Constitution and declare 
martial law during an emergency. President Johnson had this plan developed after 
the Detroit riots to crush political dissent. Senator Sam Ervin discovered in the 
early 1970s that these plans included files on 18,000 Americans. Details of the 
plan were released under the FOIA by the Western States Legal Foundation." On 
March 13, 1989 Newsweek said it may be time to have martial law because of 
crime and drugs. According to the article there are many calls for this, which was 
an obvious lie." Was this article a trial balloon to see how people would respond? 

On February 22, 1990 Rep. Newt Gingrich introduced H.R. 4079 that would 
have destroyed the Bill of Rights. This bill called for a declaration of a national 
drug and crime emergency with detention centers established in unused military 
facilities for violent criminals and drug offenders. Anyone even threatening to use 
force to protect himself or his property could be arrested. Under the broad language 
of the bill, thousands of political dissenters could have been arrested, because peo- 
ple could be arrested without clear evidence of criminal activity. The minimum 
sentence was to be five years and people's property could also have been seized. 



188 Treason The New World Order 



The national press rarely discussed this bill and its implications. According to a 
1994 Time article, Gingrich wanted to build stockades on military bases to house 
prisoners."' He hasn't given up yet. 

In the Senate, Phil Gramm introduced S 2245, a similar bill. Read these bills 
and you will appreciate how dangerous Gramm and Gingrich are. Gramm speaks 
for the moneyed interests, which is why by early 1995, he had raised more money 
than anyone else ever had by that early date for a presidential campaign. Gramm 
showed his real nature when he single-handedly blocked a bill to tighten the law 
on becoming a registered financial adviser. The House unanimously passed the 
bill, and the Senate agreed to a weakened version to please Gramm. This bill 
would have made it easier to prevent convicted felons and incompetents from 
becoming financial advisers. The $16 million required to finance the bill would 
have only come from fees levied on financial advisers." From illegally taking 
money from corporations in 1984 (151 contributions in all) to illegally using his 
staff for campaigning, Gramm is one of the most corrupt people in Washington." 
Two hundred years ago, if congressmen proposed suspending the Constitution they 
would have been run out of town or would have been arrested for treason. Today 
we make one a speaker of the House and the other a presidential contender. When 
you control the media and money you can convince people of anything! 

On July 9, 1990, six members of a U.S. Army intelligence unit went AWOL 
in West Germany. There was a worldwide high security alert to arrest them, and in 
mid- July they were arrested in Gulf Breeze. This small Florida town has for several 
years been the location of great UFO activity with some press coverage. The local 
police were told not to interrogate them, and they were allowed no outside contact. 
The national media completely distorted what they were doing and saying. For 
instance, few reported that they warned about an imminent war in the Middle East. 
Strangely, 21 days after being arrested, and after the Gulf War started, they were 
released with a general discharged. 

Recently one of the six men, Vance Davis, has gone public, saying they fled 
the Army because, as members of an intelligence unit, they had been shown above 
top secret documents stating that covert elements within the military planned to 
establish a "Multi-Jurisdictional Task Force (MJTF)" that would restore law and 
order by changing the U.S. Constitution and replacing the FBI, National Guard, 
FDA, and IRS with a National Police Force called the Black Guard. They were 
also shown much information about UFOs, a high-level cover-up, and the arrival 
of aliens. 

Starling in 1992 the National Guard, with the agreement of Governor Pedro 
Rossello, was used to stop crime and drug use in Puerto Rico. According to the 
Associated Press, "It is the first time American military units have been pressed 
into routine crime-fighting service with police." Rafael Albarran, a political 
scientist in Puerto Rico said: "The government is legitimizing military interven- 
tion within civil society." The guard were posted at 50 housing projects with 
barbed wire fences, and they monitored who entered and left these dwellings. These 
projects looked like war zones with heavily armed troops, helicopters, and armored 
personnel carriers. There have been numerous unlawful searches and seizures and 
many security cameras have been installed. In one incident a 14-year old girl was 
killed by a stray bullet, when residents thought undercover police were from a 
gang. Nothing like killing a child to protect her! The Washington Post reported on 
these events June 30, 1994, saying there have been many civil rights violations." 



Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 189 



There was little other national coverage of these events, which set a dangerous 
precedent. In 1993 the mayor of Washington, D.C. tried to use the National Guard 
to fight crime. 

On May 10, 1994, 300 marines at the Twenty-nine Palms Marine Corps base 
were asked by a U.S. Navy officer to fill out a Combat Arms Survey, which in- 
cluded questions asking if they would swear allegiance to the UN and fire on 
Americans who resisted federal gun confiscation. Questions included: Number 39: 
"I feel the President of the U.S. has the authority to pass his responsibilities as 
Commander in Chief to the UN Secretary-General. I am a UN fighting person." 
Number 40: "I feel there is no conflict between my oath of office and serving as a 
UN soldier." Number 44: "I would like UN member countries, including the U.S., 
to give the UN all the soldiers necessary to maintain world peace." Number 45: I 
am a UN fighting person and am prepared "to give my life" to maintain "every 
nation's way of life." Number 46 states that the U.S. government bans all non- 
sporting firearms with a 30 day amnesty period. After 30 days, if U.S. citizens 
refuse to surrender their weapons the survey asks: "I would lire upon U.S. citizens 
who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government." 

Lt. Commander Guy Cunningham who gave this survey was interviewed in 
Fishing and Hunting News. He said: "The importance of my survey is going to 
have to be addressed on higher levels." This survey was reportedly conducted to see 
how Marines would act in non-traditional roles in military and civilian circum- 
stances. Are we supposedly to be comforted by the implication that if U.S. troops 
kill Americans who refuse to surrender their arms, it would be a non-traditional 
role! 

The Department of Navy and Defense Department said this survey was part of 
a master's thesis and was not official government policy. They claimed it was 
only given to troops at one military base, but it was given to troops on many 
bases. Modern Gun magazine February, 1994 reported this survey or one very like 
it was given to elite Navy Seal units in September and October, 1993. About 80 
percent of the soldiers are answering no to the question of killing American citi- 
zens who refuse to give up their guns. Reportedly, at least some of those who 
answered yes are receiving special treatment and reassignment. The March, 1994 
Twenty-nine Palms base newspaper had a photo and report that members of the 
Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) visited the base and received a high-level 
tour. While I am not aware of evidence linking the CFR visit to this survey being 
given out a few months later, the timing is certainly suspicious because of CFR 
goals. 

This survey created an uproar and actually backfired, in that it alerted thou- 
sands of troops and several million Americans to the fact that something very 
wrong is taking place. American troops should never under any circumstances be 
asked such outrageous questions. This survey has been widely discussed in certain 
publications such as the American Legion Magazine (November, 1994) and 
Soldier of Fortune (November, 1994 and August, 1995), on talk radio, and com- 
puter bulletin boards. Naturally, the national media won't discuss this. Despite 
what the military states it continues to ask soldiers strange questions. A 1996 
Army Survey asks in question 30 if soldiers will agree to be part of a UN peace 
keeping/peace to be sent wherever needed? 

Rep. Bob Dornan wanted to conduct a congressional investigation into the 
survey's origins and intentions, but the House leadership blocked this. In an 



190 Treason The New World Order 



August 30, 1994 letter to Rep. Dornan, C.W. Hoffman, Jr., Staff Advocate for the 
Twenty-nine Palms Marine Corps base said the survey "did not in any way reflect 
official U.S. Marine Corps or U.S. Government policy" but that "the survey did 
consist of 46 questions regarding a variety of possible unconventional missions." 
This appears to be an admission that U.S. Marines may possibly be ordered to 
swear an oath of loyalty to the UN and to fire on American civilians who refuse to 
surrender their arms. 

If you are in the military or law enforcement, carefully consider the implica- 
tions of this survey. What will you do if you are ordered to kill Americans who 
refuse to give up their weapons? What will you do if ordered to kill peaceful 
Americans for any reason? What action will you take against those who would 
give such treasonous orders? Is your first duty and responsibility to the people and 
the Constitution, or to a corporate ruling elite that looks upon you with con- 
tempt. If you are in the military, you have a duly to not carry out unlawful or 
unconstitutional orders. Under the Manual For Courts-Martial (MCM) Paragraphs 
169b, 171a, and 216d: "A general order or regulation is lawful unless it is contrary 
to the Constitution, the laws of the U.S...." Even though certain orders have an 
inference of legality, they must still be lawful to be enforceable. An act performed 
"pursuant to an order that a man of ordinary sense and understanding would know 
to be illegal" is unlawful. Robert S. Rivkin said in The Rights of Servicemen you 
should disobey certain orders, like committing war crimes. Duress is no defense 
unless it can be proved that you would have suffered immediate death or serious 
bodily harm if you refused to obey the order." Anyone in law enforcement or the 
military who kills Americans under a phony martial law will also face the rage of 
the people. 

The Navy admitted the idea for the questions in the survey came partly from 
Presidential Review Directives (PRD) 13 and 25 about creating "a U.S. military 
force structure whose command and control would include the UN." This is false 
in that PRD 13 and PRD 25 allow for U.S. forces to serve under, not alongside, 
the UN command. Under PRD 13 "U.S. commanders under UN command did not 
have to comply with orders which they believe are: (1) outside the mandate of the 
mission, (2) illegal under U.S. law, or (3) militarily imprudent or unsound." 
These limitations put into place by General Colin Powell, were removed with 
PRD 25, which was issued by Clinton May 3, 1994 after Powell had retired. Rep. 
Bob Dornan informed me that he and Rep. Doolittle introduced H.R. 3334 to 
strictly limit instances when U.S. forces could serve under foreign command. Rep. 
Jim Lightfoot and others tried to get PRD 25 fully declassified. Under the 
summary version of PRD 25 that was released, in certain circumstances including 
emergencies "the U.S. will agree to have a UN commander exercise overall opera- 
tional control over U.S. forces." Clifford Bernath, Assistant to the Secretary of 
Defense, also said in responding to questions about reports of foreign troops in the 
U.S. "On a case by case basis, the president will consider placing appropriate U.S. 
forces under the operational control of a competent UN commander for specific UN 
operations authorized by the Security Council...." However, transferring control of 
the U.S. military to the UN is treason. On June 9, 1994 Rep. Mitchell tried to get 
this secret law declassified and reviewed by Congress. This was a rare instance 
when Congress tried and failed to get one of these secret edicts released. America is 
a country where secret laws are created by the president and Congress cannot even 
see them. This is not constitutional government." 



Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 191 



In August, 1995 Michael New, an Army medic stationed in Germany, refused 
an order to wear UN ensignias on his uniform when his unit was sent to Macedo- 
nia under the UN because it was not a lawful order. When New asked Army 
officers how his status would change if he wore UN insignias they refused to 
answer him. New said "I swore allegiance to my country not the UN," and he 
received thousands of letters of support. New's unit in Macedonia serves under a 
foreign officer and it surrendered their U.S. Army identification cards for UN iden- 
tity cards. While the Geneva convention provides some protection to U.S. troops 
when taken prisoner this is not true for UN troops. Moreover, wearing UN 
emblems is not allowed under U.S. Army regulation 670-1." New was court 
martialed in January, 1996 and found guilty of refusing to follow a lawful order to 
wear UN insignias and serve under the UN in Macadonia, but the case is under 
appeal in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. Other soldiers have also 
publicly supported New. Army Sergeant First Class Edward Rasor held a news 
conference November 9, 1995 in Washington, D.C. and announced that he would- 
n't serve under the UN or wear a UN uniform. 

On October 6, 1995, Rep. David Funderburk sent a letter to Clinton with the 
support of over 20 other representatives complaining about placing U.S. troops 
under UN command and the persecution of New. As noted in this letter, placing 
U.S. troops under the UN violates the Constitution and a president has no author- 
ity to do this. Rep. Tom Delay has introduced H.R. 2540 with 70 co-sponsors, 
and Senator Craig has introduced S 1370 with 24 co-sponsors which amends title 
10 and prohibits members of the armed forces from wearing UN insignias. While 
this is a good first step, Congress does not accept that the New case really in- 
volves a direct threat to U.S. sovereignty. U.S. troops should never serve under a 
foreign entity. 

On October 5, 1994 the House passed H.R. 4922, the Digital Telephone and 
Privacy Improvement Act, also called the Wiretap Access Bill. On October 7, 
1994 at 10:30 p.m. S. 2375 an identical bill passed by unanimous consent in the 
Senate. There was no floor debate in either House. By a unanimous consent vote, 
not one senator actually voted for the bill which gives them cover to deny respon- 
sibility for this un-Constitutional act. H.R. 4922 was introduced by Rep. Henry 
Hyde and S 2375 by Senator Patrick Leahy. Under Senate rules, one senator could 
have blocked the bill, but the few senators who expressed interest in doing this 
were visited by FBI Director Louis Freeh who convinced them to not stop the bill. 
Freeh said, "My real objective is to get access to the contents of telephone calls." 
A federal official expressed concern about "too much privacy in the wrong hands." 
The National Security Agency (NSA) also played a key role in promoting and 
getting this bill passed." 

Under this law remote-activated equipment is being used to instantly record 
phone conversations, faxes, and computer bulletin board messages. Even local 
phone companies have no idea whose phone calls are being recorded, because en- 
cryption is used. With this new law, the government will be able to tell instantly 
who you call and who is calling you. Supposedly this new law was needed because 
new technology such as fiber optics and digital switches made it harder to wiretap 
conversations. Some of the equipment required for this new law was reportedly 
installed in 1992, and the cost to taxpayers is S500 million, although it remains 
to be seen if Congress will actually grant this money. Phone company executives 
are upset because, if Congress refuses to allot the money to pay for the equipment 



192 Treason The New World Order 



needed to carry out this program, user fees will be increased and the public will get 
very angry. Hopefully, there will be legal challenges to this law. Since the equip- 
ment of private phone companies is being used, they may be liable. 

Passage of the wiretap bill means there will be conspiracy trials based on 
conversations. People will be blackmailed by federal agents to stop legal political 
activities those in power don't like. As internal FBI documents revealed in the 
Earth First case, federal authorities are tapping thousands of conversations just be- 
cause people called groups the Feds don't like. This bill was passed partly to give 
political cover to the national security state. It legalized what has continued for 
years. The massive electronic surveillance revealed in the 1970s never stopped. 
Aside from the activities of the FBI and CIA, NSA intercepts and monitors most 
forms of communication, and there are no public laws defining or limiting its 
authority. It has "spent a great deal of time and money spying on American 
citizens. For twenty-one years after its inception (1952) it tracked every telegram 
and telex in and out of the U.S., and monitored the telephone conversations of the 
politically suspect." 5 " According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center 
there were 98,000 wiretaps in 1993. 

The book, The Secret War Against the Jews, documents the massive wiretap 
program that has continued for years." The authors said: "No citizen is safe any- 
more. Privacy is gone, search warrants are meaningless, the protections of the 
courts and constitutions have been overthrown entirely, without the knowledge or 
consent of our legislatures, presidents...." A second source revealing this crim- 
inality is The Puzzle Palace, by James Bamford. He said NSA has over the years 
wiretapped conversations of congressmen taking money from foreign governments 
and accepting bribes to sell their votes."' This enables the intelligence community 
to blackmail Congress. 

During World War II the British were allowed to wiretap Americans, and to 
get around U.S. laws a sham was created so British officers at U.S. bases could 
ask for wiretap information on thousands of U.S. citizens. Thus supposedly, no 
U.S. agencies were doing the actual wiretap so no U.S. laws were broken. For in- 
stance, the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act limits U.S. intelligence 
agencies in domestic intelligence, but it places no limits on the activities of for- 
eign intelligence activities in the U.S. Thus the massive U.S. wiretap program 
continued, supposedly under the leadership of British intelligence agents. Behind 
the scenes, British intelligence agents have been extremely active in America for 
much of this century. This farce continues today and is also used with Canada and 
Australia. Initially these wiretaps were conducted against Jews and Nazi sympa- 
thizers, but the program gradually extended to all Americans. This information 
was leaked by disgruntled agents partly because the wiretap program has gotten so 
ridiculous. Jewish children calling home from summer camps are wiretapped. 

Grant Jeffrey, in the Final Warning, presents information that the government 
is monitoring all phone conversations in the U.S. with Cray super-computers. 
With certain people the conversations are targeted so that if specific words are used 
individuals then play back that discussion. The government can also download any 
computer as was done with the spy Richard Ames. 

A clue to the vast wiretapping now taking place was revealed in October, 
1995 when the FBI petitioned to wiretap up to one in every 100 phones. The 
objective was to simultaneously wiretap 1.5 million lines. The government could 
then intercept tens of thousands of calls at once. Phone company executives were 



Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 193 



shocked, because they have never seen the FBI monitor more than seven phones at 
once in the same office. Mark Rasch director of a security think tank said this 
suggests they're doing many more wiretaps than has been admitted. " CBS 
Evening News on November 30, 1995 said the phone company NYNEX admitted 
it had recorded thousands of phone conversations without permission. The Wall 
Street Journal said the telephone workers' union confirmed that 1 in 50 Mexican 
phone lines are wiretapped." The Spanish war in the 1930s was a testing ground 
for the weapons used in World War II. In a similar fashion Mexico is a client state 
for various U.S. federal agencies and, from voting machines to surveillance tech- 
nologies, what occurs in Mexico is also applied in the U.S. 

Although the courts have at times blocked government wiretaps of Ameri- 
cans," in more recent years a special court has readily complied with all govern- 
ment requests to wiretap conversations. On May 4, 1994 CBS Evening News said 
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) established in 1979 approved 
requests for electronic surveillance of Americans over 7,500 times. Meeting in 
secret in the Justice Department this court has granted all but one request. On 
February 9, 1995 Clinton signed EO 12949 greatly expanding the power of the 
FISC to allow the Justice Department to conduct physical or electronic surveil- 
lance without obtaining a search warrant in open court, without notifying the 
victim, and without needing to provide an inventory of what was seized. Evidence 
gathered under FISC jurisdiction can now be used in criminal trials. Previously 
such evidence was only used for intelligence. Many people have complained about 
the telephone bill, yet few are aware of this EO which provides even more author- 
ity to monitor people than that allowed under the telephone act. In 1972 U.S. v. 
U.S. District Court, the Supreme Court said warrantless surveillance violates the 
Fourth Amendment, warning that the "danger to political dissent is acute where 
the government attempts (acts) under so vague a concept as the power to protect 
'domestic security.'"" 

It is quite easy for the government to get people's phone records and there is 
no requirement for people to be notified of this. In 1978 the U.S. Court of Ap- 
peals for the D.C. Circuit said that phone records belong to the phone company 
not to customers. Typically, the government serves a subpoena to get phone 
records and the phone company automatically complies. In a recent year Pacific 
Bell received 14,765 subpoenas while Bell Atlantic received 7,098. 

In 1991 Gregory Millman, a financial reporter, charged that billions of dollars 
in taxes owed by GM, Kellogg, and other large corporations were never collected 
by the IRS because of currency and interest-rate hedging techniques. Millman 
claimed that he used internal IRS documents to write the article. The IRS re- 
sponded by getting his phone records and those of numerous other people in a 
broad sweep, which probably involved more work than the IRS exercised to collect 
these taxes. In 1991 Procter & Gamble got the Cincinnati police to examine over 
35 million long-distance phone calls to find someone who was giving the Wall 
Street Journal critical information about the company."' 

When I started making phone calls to gather material for this book, I soon 
started hearing clicking noises on both my phones. Once when I said what I 
thought of those listening on the other end, the noises promptly stopped. The 
wiretap comes and goes every so often, because a writer is rarely a high priority 
threat and the noises occur depending on whom I call. Once the noise was so loud 
and constant I called the local phone company repair department and told them 



194 Treason The New World Order 



there was a wiretap on my line using old equipment and asked them to get the 
government to switch to better equipment. The person wasn't surprised, and the 
noises soon stopped. Another time, while talking to a contact in Oklahoma, the 
line was cut twice in several minutes. I am aware of one person who has installed 
a device that lights up when a wiretap is activated on his line. 

If you don't believe this, start calling various patriot or environmental groups 
expressing your interest in getting involved, and you will probably start hearing 
strange noises on your phone, although equipment is being gradually upgraded so 
before too long there will be no noises on the line when your phone is bugged. 
People with a high priority are already wiretapped with equipment that emits no 
noises. This is our tax dollars at work. While this is completely against the Con- 
stitution, I am not suggesting that there is any immediate physical threat to this 
surveillance. However, if one were to speak of committing violent acts, one might 
be arrested, disappear, or have an arranged suicide or accident, depending on how 
much of a threat one were perceived to be by the security state. 

The main focus as in any tyrannical government is to remain in power by 
controlling the people, which means surveillance especially of those deemed to be 
a potential threat. Ex-head of the CIA James Woolsey told Congress that CIA spy 
satellites can hear almost any conversation. In late 1995 ABCs Primetime Live 
said since 1993 cameras have been used to record cars that go through red lights. 
This means cars can be located throughout the U.S., when this technology is ap- 
plied nationally, as in inevitable. Of course, the people will be told the benefits of 
this tighter surveillance. Various federal agencies such as the IRS, DEA, FBI, 
Customs, EPA, and OSHA paid $97 million in 1993 to Americans who reported 
violations of laws. The Washington Post said the CIA has called on spouses of 
intelligence or military personnel to report any suspicious activities to the author- 
ities. In the new world order, loyalty to the state will be more important than the 
family unit. Getting many people to spy on others is one more sign of a coming 
police state. 

Increasingly, local police agencies use surveillance systems often with the 
support of the federal government. Military surveillance technology is now used in 
domestic police work." Electronic surveillance is used to see who to arrest in the 
future. People are put into different categories, depending on their perceived threat 
to the government. This determines when they will be arrested in an emergency. 
After someone is initially categorized and put onto a certain list, surveillance gen- 
erally takes place, with recording equipment which is occasionally listened to de- 
pending on what category you are in. If certain words are spoken, the recordings 
may be listened to more often. 

In 1952 the World Association of Parliamentarians for World Government re- 
leased a map positioning foreign troops in the U.S. as part of a world government. 
On September 21, 1992 Bush said at the UN: "The U.S. is prepared to make 
available our bases and facilities for multinational training and field exercises." 
Today there are growing reports of foreign troops and military equipment in the 
U.S. The NBC Evening News November 30, 1994 quoted the Pentagon as admit- 
ting there were currently 5,000 foreign troops in the U.S. undergoing training. 
While such training has continued for years, these troops are now coming to the 
U.S. in units instead of individually. NBC reported September 7, 1994 that 500 
Russian troops would be in the U.S. in 1995 for training exercises. The 
Washington Post also reported on U.S. Soviet military maneuvers in the U.S. in 



Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 195 



1995. "There are many reports of foreign troops at Fort Polk, Louisiana, Fort 
Riley, Kansas, and Holloman Air Force base in New Mexico CBS News on 
August 18, 1995 said 4,000 foreign troops from 14 East European nations were 
being trained at Fort Polk for UN peace keeping and civilian control operations. 
On May 2, 1996 the New York Times said a new agreement provided for training 
Mexican troops on U.S. bases. 

In the summer and fall of 1994, U.S. troops were in Russia conducting ma- 
neuvers. There was an official admission that there were joint Russian/U.S. 
military exercises taking place in the U.S. and Russia but the announcement took 
place in Moscow. On September 5, 1994 General Pavel Grachev acknowledged 
that U.S. and Russian forces were conducting joint exercises in the U.S. as well as 
in Russia to deal with riots, terrorist attacks, and other emergencies. 

Spotlight published evidence of UN/foreign troop movements in the U.S. and 
has produced many photos of Russian and UN military vehicles in America. 
Because of these reports, Congress was flooded with inquiries. Clifford Bernath, 
Assistant to the Secretary of Defense, sent people a letter on this topic declaring 
all is fine. He said some Russians may undergo training in the U.S. in 1995, and 
in March, 1994, 50 Russian soldiers participated in a joint exercise in Alaska. 
Bernath acknowledged that Canadian troops trained at Marine bases in southern 
California in early 1994. Their military vehicles reportedly moved on a 110-car 
train and some vehicles had UN markings. Senator Conrad Burns got a letter from 
the Department of the Army saying the railroad cars were loaded with Canadian 
army vehicles returning to Canada from Camp Pendleton, California where train- 
ing had been conducted "under the umbrella of the UN." 

While the Pentagon claims that reports of Soviet-bloc military equipment 
spotted in the U.S. are just old surplus, numerous photos show that the latest 
Russian equipment is showing up across the U.S. This includes the Russian Hind- 
E helicopter, SA-13 missile launcher, SA-13 Gopher surface-to-air missile sys- 
tem, BTR-60 armored personnel carrier, and T-72 and T-80 tanks. There are clearly 
too many Russian tanks and armor here to just be used in target practice and 
training exercises as the government claims, and none of this equipment is listed 
in the Pentagon inventory of military equipment. 

According to the September 25, 1994 Daily News, in Alamogordo, New 
Mexico, there are "500 (foreign) operational tracked and wheeled vehicles" at the 
White Sands Missile Range in Alamogordo. The article included a photo of a long 
row of T-72 tanks which "stand at the ready." The article said there are similar 
"tank farms" with Russian military vehicles at military bases in Arizona, Florida, 
and Maryland. The Gulfport, Mississippi airport and Fort Irwin, California report- 
edly also have much Russian military equipment. The September 22, 1994 San 
Diego Union Tribune had a classified ad to hire someone to service Russian mili- 
tary equipment. 

One citizen photographed a truck hauling a Russian T-72 lank along a high- 
way north of San Antonio. When spotted taking the photos he was forced off the 
road. Two hours later when he returned home a car that had been behind the truck 
hauling the T-72 was parked in front of his home. This citizen got his shotgun 
and walked towards the car which promptly drove away. Since when is it a crime 
for an American to take photos of military vehicles on a public highway! And 
why should this be a secret? In 1994 a unit of German troops camped near Wick- 
enburg, Arizona. No local authorities were told about this. A local resident told 



196 Treason The New World Order 



them to leave or he would come back with friends and drive them away using 
gunfire if necessary. They promptly left. 

Will large numbers of third world troops be brought here supposedly for UN 
training, while the U.S. military is weakened and stationed overseas? The number 
of U.S. divisions has been sharply cut and thousands of U.S. troops are overseas. 
The people should demand that no foreign troops be allowed into the U.S. for UN 
related duties. We still have over 100,000 troops defending Europe from a Russian 
army that is collapsing, and in late 1995 Clinton committed 25,000 troops to 
Bosnia with many more providing support. From deployment in Somalia, Haiti, 
Kuwait, South Korea, and perhaps the Golan Heights, the federal government has 
an endless appetite to station troops overseas. 

Many unsubstantiated rumors claim that hundreds of thousands of foreign 
troops are secretly stationed on U.S. soil. The New American did a 12-page report 
on foreign troops in the U.S., but it found evidence of no more than a limited 
number of foreign troops here." While there may be over 5,000 foreign troops in 
the U.S., this has not yet been confirmed. The greater concern is what do these 
events mean? Today it is 5,000 or more foreign troops here. What will it be in the 
future? Are the military exercises in preparation for seizing all guns from the 
people? Are these foreign troops in the U.S. quietly getting familiar with the roads 
and terrain to provide guidance for large groups of UN troops that may later be 
brought in? 

On November 5, 1993 Senator Roth introduced Amendment 1122 to the 1993 
crime bill calling for the U.S. to hire Hong Kong police into the federal police. 
This was also discussed in Section 5108 of the same bill. Supposedly, they were 
needed to deal with Asian gangs in the U.S., and no limit was placed on the num- 
ber to be hired. This amendment actually passed the Senate, but was removed in 
the House/Senate conference. With Hong Kong returning to China in 1997 this 
law would have provided a legal excuse to bring thousands of Chinese communist 
troops into the U.S." 

Another disturbing trend is that, in recent years, American troops have been 
conducting military exercises in our cities and suburbs, sometimes using live 
ammunition. Are these training exercises being conducted as a prelude to disarm- 
ing Americans? The U.S. Army Office of Public Affairs said its urban warfare 
training is allowed under the Defense Department Authorization Act of 1987. 
While there has been heated discussion in some local newspapers about these 
exercises, the national media rarely discusses this topic. According to veteran re- 
porter Sarah McClendon, in the Washington Report, August 26, 1994 "The U.S. 
Army admitted that it had been training local police and National Guard (units) in 
how to break and enter private property since 1987." The government has estab- 
lished a MJTF training facility in Belle Chasse, Louisiana to conduct anti-terrorist 
exercises. Increasingly, National Guard units are receiving training in urban war- 
fare on U.S. military bases. Why is such training necessary? 

A MJTF training exercise included the FBI and Marines in civilian clothes, 
with live ammunition used at the vacant Del Sol Hotel in Yuma, Arizona in the 
spring of 1994. Residents nearby were given no advance notice and some were 
scared by the gunfire. The Yuma raid was discussed on the front page of The Yuma 
Daily Sun on October 21, 1994. On June 12, 1995 residents of Des Plaines, Illi- 
nois were disturbed from their sleep by a MJTF training operation that involved 
low flying planes and live ammunition. Local police denied this was happening, 



Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 197 



but later admitted they were ordered not to talk about it. Key Largo, Florida resi- 
dents were awakened by a similar military assault. 

Plans to conduct a military exercise in the empty Book-Cadillac Hotel in 
Detroit were cancelled after news of the exercise was published in the Detroit Free 
Press July 23, 1994. The military wanted to place sharpshooters on the nearby 
Book Tower office building. However, a live ammunition exercise was conducted 
by a MJTF unit, including regular Army troops, in the Detroit suburb of Van 
Buren in late September and early October, 1994. Michigan State Rep. Deborah 
Whyman and some aides found live ammunition and an unused grenade at the 
scene, which was not even secured after the exercise. They were under constant 
surveillance while inspecting the buildings. 

When the The Olympian, on July 5, 1994, published plans to parachute 
troops into downtown Rainer, Washington to fight a unit of the National Guard 
using blank ammunition, there was an uproar. Many citizens complained at a 
town meeting, and permission to hold the exercise was revoked. Citizens were 
scared when the Marines and FBI conducted a joint exercise, in late July, 1994, on 
Tybee Island, Georgia. Helicopters hovered over homes in the middle of the night. 
On July 18, 1994 a press release from Camp Pendleton announced that some 
Marines and Navy personnel would undergo urban training at "privately owned 
sites and military installations" near Sacramento from July 23 to August 3. 
According to the Miami Herald, Miami Beach gave permission for a military 
exercise to be held in early 1995 at the abandoned St. Hortiz Hotel. The Army 
wanted to use live ammunition in this hotel, which is in the heart of a busy 
district. 

Several years ago the National Guard State Partnership Program was estab- 
lished to exchange American soldiers in guard units with personnel from the for- 
mer Soviet Union, supposedly to promote democracy and human rights in these 
foreign countries. Arrangements have already been established between Alabama 
and Romania, Arizona and Kazakhstan, California and Ukraine, Colorado and 
Slovenia, Illinois and Poland, Indiana and Slovakia, Maryland and Estonia, 
Michigan and Latvia, Ohio and Hungary, Pennsylvania and Lithuania, Tennessee 
and Bulgaria, Texas and the Chech Republic, South Carolina and Albania, and 
Utah and Belarus. These 14 states reportedly volunteered to participate in this 
program. Have any citizens of these states even heard of this program? The Depart- 
ment of Defense is spending $33 million to promote this operation, and Russia 
will soon be a participant. 

This is a program that could bring into the U.S. tens of thousands of soldiers 
from former communist countries, while our troops are sent overseas. These for- 
eign troops would not defend our freedom, and if U.S. soldiers are out of the 
country it would be hard for them to protect the people. If such foreign troops 
were ordered to seize all arms here and kill those who resisted, they would proba- 
bly follow such orders while most American soldiers would not. Moreover, federal 
authorities have been quietly removing tanks and other heavy equipment from 
certain armories. 

The Defense Department wants to eliminate half the 110,000 Army National 
Guard combat troops. The remaining National Guard combat units would transfer 
to support activities like managing supplies. Supposedly this would be done to 
save money. Between 1989 and 1998 the active-duty Army is to be cut 36 percent, 
while the Army National Guard is to be reduced 20 percent."' There are also reports 



198 Treason The New World Order 



■ * 




Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 199 



that Army reserve units would be placed under the command of FEMA during an 
emergency. An interview with a Jewish leader of the Texas Constitutional Militia 
in the December 4, 1994 issue of the London Sunday Telegraph helps explain why 
the National Guard is being weakened. Reserve guardsmen, police officers, and ac- 
tive duty military officers quietly work with militias across the country. 

There are been unconfirmed reports that members of street gangs such as the 
Crips and Bloods are being recruited and trained to be used as shock troops to raid 
homes, seize guns, and arrest certain people. Newsweek had an article about gangs 
being in the military and the U.S. Justice Department working with them." The 
Washington Times said the federal government allocated an initial $2.5 million to 
recruit street gangs into a neighborhood watch program in Washington, D.C. Will 
every city soon see this? In June, 1996 the press said the Justice Department was 
going to hold a conference with gang leaders from across the nation to discuss 
common problems. FEMA is involved in a secret program called the National 
Guard Civilian Opportunity Act which involves placing troubled youths in youth 
camps to give them military training and discipline. Gang members could be a 
vast resource to create terror. Just in the Chicago area, according to police reports, 
there are 100,000 gang members, and the White House on May 13, 1996 said 
there were 16,000 gangs with 500,000 members. 

In 1979 William R. Pabst released a detailed report with the locations of vari- 
ous prison camps in the U.S. already established for civilians." Reagan reportedly 
signed a national security directive activating 11 large prison camps. The U.S. 
Army field manual FM 41-10 titled Civil Affairs Operations, dated January, 1993, 
discusses methods for rounding up civilians and place them in detention centers. 
Included are FEMA chain of command information and diagrams of detention 
centers. Other U.S. Army documents state that it has plans for "regulation of 
civilian inmate labor utilization" and for "preparing requests to establishing civil- 
ian prison camps on (Army) installations." In 1994 C. Dean Rhody of the U.S. 
Army Training and Doctrine Command in Fort Monroe, Virginia sent a memo 
about a "Draft Army Regulation on Civilian Inmate Program" stating that "the 
new regulation will provide the following: (a) Policy for civilian inmate utiliza- 
tion on installations, (b) Procedures for preparing requests to establish civilian 
inmate labor programs on installations, and (c) Procedures for preparing requests to 
establish civilian prison camps on installations." When the researcher, Dennis 
Cuddy, called to confirm this memo, he was told the memo was "leaked" and was 
"premature" because it was a "draft regulation" that had not been finalized." The 
U.S. Army War College report "The Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict 
Short of War" states that the role of the military was changing from national de- 
fense to suppression and control of populations in the U.S. and under the UN. 

According to the General Accounting Office, by 1994, 88 percent of the 
closed military bases had been taken over by other government agencies. Report- 
edly certain bases and FEMA installations are being turned into prison camps. The 
Seneca Army Depot by Seneca Falls, N.Y. is one Army base reportedly being 
closed and converted to a federal prison. Senator Alfonse D'Amato has confirmed 
that much heavy construction is taking place at this base which will be turned 
over to the National Guard. This and other closed bases usually ban the public, and 
barbed wire has been placed around many of these bases. 

The Immigration Reduction Act of 1995 (H.R. 2162) calls for the Secretary 
of Defense to provide the Attorney General with a list of all closed military bases 



200 Treason The New World Order 



in the U.S. with facilities "suitable for detention and upon request of the Attorney 
General shall give assistance as the Attorney General may require to take posses- 
sion of and operate such facilities." There remains an interest to provide facilities 
to imprison many people. RX 84, discussed above, calls for the arrest of 100,000 
to 400,000 people, so the government must have facilities ready to suddenly im- 
prison so many people. While I do not feel that conclusive evidence has been 
presented yet as to what is being done with the closed bases, this situation must 
be closely watched, especially because of our history of imprisoning or proprosing 
to imprison many people. 

In the past, entire tribes of Native Americans were resettled or deliberately 
killed. Thousands of American Indian children were forceably taken from their 
families and placed in special schools or with non-Indian families to destroy their 
cultural roots. During World War I, governors from four western states asked the 
federal government to imprison members of the Industrial Workers of the World 
until the war was over. In 1939 the Hobbs "Concentration Camp" Bill passed the 
House by a large majority, calling for the detention of aliens. Over 110,000 
Japanese-Americans were abruptly arrested and sent to concentration camps in 
harsh regions during World War II. None of these people had ever committed even 
one act against the U.S. Authorities were able to move fast because lists had been 
prepared in advance. The 1950 Internal Security Act had provisions to establish 
prison camps for subversives. Senator Paul Douglas helped draft this law without 
realizing he was on an FBI list to be arrested as a threat to national security. In 
1968 the House Un-American Activities Committee advocated detention centers 
during the civil rights disturbances. It called for scaling ghettos, restricting entry, 
curfews, and the suspension of civil rights during a "guerrilla uprising." The full 
report reads like a gestapo tirade. Threatening or actually putting political dissi- 
dents into concentration camps is a well established tradition in America recog- 
nized by many people unless you are a politician or in the establishment press. 

For a preview of the future, consider the tight control now in effect at U.S. 
airports. To board a plane a photo I.D. is required. If we one day wake up and dis- 
cover that some excuse has been used to suspend the Constitution and establish 
martial law, would most of Congress in the name of national security not say a 
word? Would Congress be too busy taking money from special interests to enrich 
themselves to get reelected? What does it take for Congress to recognize and ques- 
tion treason and sedition when it takes place? Part of the problem is that many in 
Congress are closely allied with the corporate elite. 



201 



Chapter XVI 
The Oklahoma Bombing 

'All warfare is based on deception." 

Sun Tzu Wu 

'People who shut their eyes to reality simply invite their own destruction. 

James Baldwin 



There is ample evidence that the government is involved in a major cover-up 
in the Oklahoma bombing. Much about this atrocity have been revealed by vari- 
ous investigators including Dave Hall until recently owner of KPOC-TV in Ponca 
City, Oklahoma; Channel 4 KFOR-TV the NBC affiliate in Oklahoma City; Brig. 
General USAF (Ret.) Ben Partin; Ted Gunderson, an FBI agent for 27 years who 
retired as head of the FBI office in L.A.; John Rappoport author of Oklahoma 
Bombing The Suppressed Truth; J.D. Cash; and Pat Briley. One doesn't have to 
believe all the information these investigators have uncovered, but why is the 
national media keeping it from the American people? J.D. Cash, an Oklahoma 
reporter told me the local Associated Press (AP) branch wouldn't carrying his 
stories because the U.S. Justice Department wouldn't approve them. In a free 
society there would be outrage. Instead there is silence and news censorship. 

As in any crime, one must examine who benefited to find a motive in the 
Oklahoma bombing. The secret government had seven objectives including: dis- 
credit the militias and Patriot movement, weaken the NRA which helped defeat 
many anti-gun congressmen in 1994, pass repressive bills in Congress, increase 
federal power to tighten control over the people, and destroying records about 
Waco and the Gulf War Syndrome which were reportedly stored in that federal 
building. The bombing also provide Clinton with another opportunity to call the 
Republicans extremists by linking them with the militias. The secret government 
wanted to slow the momentum of the new Republican members of Congress. In 
addition, on April 22, 1995, Hillary Clinton was questioned about Whitewater by 
independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr and three aides. You probably didn't hear 
about this because of the Oklahoma bombing. 

If you are going to maintain a large national security state, there must be a 
threat to justify its continued existence. Otherwise too many people would realize 
that we don't really need to spend billions of dollars on a problem that barely ex- 
ists. For the security state to continue, there must sometimes be large terrorist 
acts in the U.S. The last thing the national security state wants is peace and no 
enemies. For decades there was the communist threat. In recent years, with the de- 
clared end of the cold war, numerous "experts" have appeared in the media warning 
about the dire threat of terrorism. Meanwhile, terrorist incidents against Americans 
have dropped from 111 in 1977 to nine in 1987. In 1991 there were seven terrorist 



202 Treason The New World Order 



acts. Several years ago, the largest number of attacks on Americans overseas was 
in Chile against the Mormon church. People in the militias and Patriot movement 
strongly criticized the bombing, and they have nothing to gain and much to lose 
by committing terrorist acts. It is also strange that no groups claimed credit for the 
bombing, which is the norm with terrorist attacks. 

We now have terrorism on demand when certain bills are before Congress. 
The FBI released a terrorist alert August 1, 1995 saying there might be a terrorist 
attack at the end of August to commemorate the Randy Weaver raid in 1992. On 
August 19, Clinton said "It's hard to imagine what more must happen to convince 
Congress to pass the bill." Then a terrorist alert for the airports was publicized in 
August, and right on schedule on August 28, three New York City area airports 
were closed for hours after a phone threat to an unlisted phone number at a key 
facility. The FBI suspected a disgruntled employee, because it would be very diffi- 
cult for terrorists to get this unlisted number. These events occurred just as the 
House again considered passing the terrorist bill. The 1968 crime bill passed after 
King and Kennedy were assassinated, and another crime bill passed in 1994 after 
the World Trade Center (WTC) bombing. 

Oklahoma may have been chosen partly because Governor Frank Keating had 
been an FBI agent, a senior official in the Justice Department, and Assistant 
Secretary of the Treasury in charge of the ATF. Instead of trying to answer ques- 
tions about the bombing, Keating has criticized people in Oklahoma who question 
the government version of the attack and has said people should trust the govern- 
ment and the FBI. Keating has stymied efforts in the Oklahoma legislature, led by 
Rep. Charles Key, to get a state investigation of the bombing independent of the 
FBI. Also, in Oklahoma almost 45 percent of the jobs are government related so 
many people are afraid they will be fired and lose their pension if they complain 
about the investigation. 

If you have difficulty believing the government was involved in the Okla- 
homa building consider what happened at the New York WTC. The New Yorker 
said the CIA funded and trained certain Afghan groups that trained some of the 
gang that bombed the WTC After the arrests, it was revealed on the front page of 
the New York Times October 28, 1993 that Emad A. Salem, a member of the 
gang and a retired Egyptian army officer, was an FBI informant who had secretly 
recorded his conversations with the FBI. Salem became a full-time FBI informant 
on November, 1991. The Washington Post said he stopped working for the FBI in 
1992, supposedly because he failed a polygraph test. Despite these claims, after 
the bombing he again miraculously became qualified to be a government agent, 
and was paid one million dollars for his court testimony. 2 How convenient! 

According to the transcripts, Salem targeted the WTC per FBI orders, and he 
wanted to use phony explosives to prevent damage to the WTC, but the FBI 
supervisor blocked this. The gang were amateurs, so Salem rented the garage and 
provided technical assistance to build the bomb. This was recorded on FBI surveil- 
lance tapes.' The FBI did just about everything to help the gang, but refused to 
arrest them. Salem told an FBI agent "Your supervisor is the main reason of 
bombing the WTC." The supervisor Salem complained about was probably 
brought in by higher authorities to make sure the terrorist attack occurred. FBI 
agent Frederic Whitehurst, who testified about improprieties with the FBI crime 
lab during the O.J. trial, also testified at the WTC trial. He was physically threat- 
ened and pressured to lie about questionable lab results. 



The Oklahoma Bombing 203 



Salem wanted to complain to FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. about the 
local FBI's failure to stop the bombing, because he felt the FBI didn't listen to his 
warnings to stop the attack before it occurred. One agent agreed that the local FBI 
people "didn't want to get their butts chewed." Another agent said: "You cannot 
force people to do the right thing." 4 The FBI even tried to cover-up their actions to 
make Salem's claims unbelievable. Why didn't these revelations cause an uproar in 
Congress and the press? Instead there was silence and the Oklahoma City bomb- 
ing. With over 1,000 people injured, it is amazing that no one has sued the federal 
government for negligence. 

The Discovery TV channel, on April 28, 1996, said the arrests took place 
because of good police work and tracing the car axle code. Recently A & E TV 
presented a show on the WTC bombing and Mike Wallace referred to "a lucky 
break" in making the arrests. Then Salem's role as an FBI informant was noted, 
but no one explained why the bombing wasn't prevented. Perhaps one day James 
Fox, the ex-FBI agent in charge of the New York office during the bombing, will 
be forced to testify about these events. On May 19, 1996 Parade magazine, in a 
front page story that appeared in Sunday newspapers across the country, proudly 
and falsely declared that identifying the number on the rented van played a "crucial" 
role in arresting the gang. No mention was made of the crucial role the FBI played 
in setting up this bombing. Increasingly our society is built on lies. 

McVeigh rented the truck used in the bombing in his own name, was arrested 
while speeding in a car without license plates, and he had no registration. It is also 
strange that McVeigh made no attempt to resist being arrested despite having a 
gun. He stayed in motels under his own name using the Nichol's Michigan farm 
as his home address. How could McVeigh have done such a sophisticated bombing 
and yet be so careless? That makes no sense unless he was deliberately set up to 
take the fall as Ted Gunderson and others have said. The same pattern occurred 
with Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, and Sirhan Sirhan. McVeigh did not 
have the training, money, resources, or record of resourcefulness to do this bomb- 
ing alone. Time was also told by investigators that McVeigh was not smart 
enough to pull off the operation alone. While McVeigh certainly seems to have 
been involved he was being used by others. 

McVeigh had no reliable job yet he had lots of money. Time said he had 
$10,000 with no explanation of how he got this money.' McVeigh supposedly 
robbed Roger Moore, an Arkansas gun collector, November 5, 1994. Moore ad- 
mitted being friends with McVeigh and said he was a guest at times. Reportedly, 
Moore has CIA and ATF contacts and ran a CIA front company. Linking 
McVeigh to this robbery may be disinformation to explain how McVeigh had so 
much money. When the Detroit Free Press filed an FOIA request to obtain infor- 
mation about this robbery, it learned that the FBI pressured the local sheriff to 
alter the robbery report. According to an affidavit given by FBI agent Arthur 
Baker, Moore did not even file an insurance claim for items stolen in the robbery. 

Evidence suggests that McVeigh was known to the ATF and that he was pos- 
sibly under surveillance for some time before the Oklahoma bombing. McVeigh 
was never even questioned about the Arkansas robbery, and he was at Waco, during 
and shortly after, the siege selling bumper stickers. The government used surveil- 
lance cameras to record such people. At a 1994 Arizona gun show, McVeigh was 
spotted by a government agent illegally selling an anti-helicopter weapon. No 
action was taken against him. NBC reported on August 1, 1995 that Glynn Tipton 



204 Treason The New World Order 



called the ATF because McVeigh was trying to buy large quantities of a fuel 
additive and a fuel used in auto racing which might be used in an explosive. The 
ATF did not act on this tip." 

John Doe 2 has still not been found. Just after the explosion the police re- 
leased an All-Points Bulletin (APB) for a late model brown pickup driven by two 
Middle Eastern males. Within hours the FBI cancelled the APB, refusing to say 
why, and demanded that it not be rebroadcast. According to Dave Hall, the author- 
ities had pictures of McVeigh and another person leaving the scene of the crime in 
this pickup. Yet weeks later, when Hall asked the authorities why they weren't 
still searching for this car along with John Doe 2, they denied having said there 
was such a car. When a tape of the admission was played the authorities had "no 
comment." J.D. Cash has interviewed almost 30 people who saw McVeigh with 
other people in Oklahoma and Kansas shortly before the bombing. Authorities 
have also not found the small trailer seen hitched to the Ryder truck that McVeigh 
rented in Junction City, Kansas.' 

The New York Times" and Newsweek" interviewed various witnesses who saw 
John Doe 2 with McVeigh. However, the New York Times quoted authorities as 
saying they have turned up little evidence that John Doe 2 exists. Time also 
quoted investigators who now claim John Doe 2 doesn't exist.'" An ex-FBI agent 
told USA Today "I'm starting to wonder if he exists if he wasn't a red herring." 
There was an announcement that John Doe 2 was identified as a U.S. soldier but 
this claim was quietly dropped. The people who rented the Ryder truck to 
McVeigh remain certain that a second person was with him and that John Doe 2 
exists. 

In Oklahoma City Channel 4 news director Melissa Kinzing confirmed the 
station has two witnesses who saw McVeigh and an Iraqi ex-soldier in a local bar, 
and a witness who saw an Iraqi driving away from the bombing in a brown 
pickup. Over the weeks, Channel 4 interviewed at least six people who saw 
McVeigh with several people including John Doe 2, and concluded that he is 
probably an Iraqi and a former member of the Republican Guard. In 1993 and 
1994, Clinton brought thousands of Iraqi soldiers into the U.S. Many of them 
settled in Oklahoma. On October 18, 1993 the Washington Times said over 3,400 
Iraqi soldiers and their dependents had settled in the U.S. with 4,600 more ex- 
pected. On August 30, 1993 the Salt Lake City Tribune said 100 members of 
Congress wanted this program stopped. This is one more quiet operation that has 
brought thousands of foreign troops into the U.S. 

Channel 4 KFOR-TV on June 7, 1995 presented a report on John Doe 2 
claiming he was still in Oklahoma City, and eye-witnesses identified him with 
McVeigh. The FBI has refused to even interview this person. Although this Iraqi 
wasn't identified by Channel 4, two other local TV stations, Channels 5 and 9, 
interviewed this person and he denied involvement in the bombing. Channel 9 
presented a time sheet supporting the person's claim that he was at work during 
the bombing, but Channel 4 found people at that business who confirmed that this 
firm doesn't use time sheets. On August 24, 1995 Al-Hussaini Hussain, an Okla- 
homa City resident and Iraqi who may have been in the Republican Guard, filed a 
suit against Channel 4 claiming they had falsely accused him of being involved in 
the bombing. 

On August 17, 1995 Jayna Davis a Channel 4 reporter said: "These eye- 
witnesses show prime suspect McVeigh could not have acted alone....At least two 



The Oklahoma Bombing 205 



more men, possibly three, were also there." NBC won't run the reports of these 
witnesses nationally, supposedly because Channel 4 won't give it the names of 
several of its witnesses who are terrified of being publicly identified. People 
remember the many deaths surrounding the Kennedy assassination." Except in a 
few cities, like Seattle and New York, NBC stations have refused to carry the 
many reports by Channel 4 on the Oklahoma bombing because they don't support 
the government version. 

Although aware who many of these witnesses are, the FBI refuses to interro- 
gate them, others were told by the FBI to keep quiet, and none were brought before 
the grand jury or offered protection. On January 24, 1995 PBS radio interviewed 
several of the witnesses who saw McVeigh and John Doe 2. One said someone 
threatened to kill him if he didn't shut up. The independent investigator, Pat 
Briley, has received death threats and been harassed by the FBI. One witness not 
called to testify before the grand jury, Mike Moroz of Johnny's Tire in Oklahoma 
City, gave McVeigh and another person directions to the federal building at 8:40 
a.m. on April 19. Private investigators believe John Doe 2 is a government agent 
or informant, which is why the government won't let these people testify before 
the grand jury. 

There are at least five surveillance video tapes from buildings near the federal 
building that prosecutors have refused to release to the press or the defense. These 
videos show McVeigh with John Doe 2 just before the bombing, but the grand 
jurors were only shown video still photographs of the Ryder truck. The public 
release of a photo of John Doe 2 from a video would have made it easier to arrest 
him, which may be why this evidence is being suppressed. The FBI has admitted 
it is investigating two of its agents in the L.A. office for illegally attempting to 
sell a video for $1 million to two TV networks. These two agents did not even 
have the authority to possess these tapes. Oklahoma private investigator, Robert 
Jerlow, saw the video in L.A. and along with his attorney, Randy Shadid, got 
involved in negotiating with a TV network. Jerlow said John Doe 2 got out of the 
truck 2 to 5 minutes after McVeigh which means the defense might be able to 
claim that John Doe 2 not McVeigh set the bomb. Consider the many leaks about 
the Unabomber which upset the Justice Department. Increasingly federal police are 
leaking information and serving as media consultants." 

There is considerable evidence that it is absolutely impossible for a fertilizer 
bomb to have caused the resulting damage. Clinton appears to understand this. On 
June 12, 1995 the Cape Cod Times using an AP report quoted Clinton saying the 
bomb used in Oklahoma was "a miracle of technology." Retired Brigadier General 
Benton K. Partin is one of the world's foremost experts on explosives technology 
including precision-guided weapons and related target acquisition. He spent 25 
years designing and testing weapons for the U.S. military. On July 13, 1995, 
Partin released a 23-page report on the Oklahoma bombing. It was put on the 
Internet and summarized in The New American." The magnitude and pattern of 
damage made it impossible for the damage to have been caused by an explosion 
outside the building on the street. "The total incompatibility with a single truck 
bomb lies in the fact that either some of the columns collapsed that should not 
have collapsed or some of the columns are still standing that should have collapsed 
and did not." He said the pattern of damage suggested an implosion with 
explosives attached to the columns probably at the third floor because that is 
where the columns failed. 



206 Treason The New World Order 



Authorities raised the bomb yield from 1,000 to 1,100, to 2,000, to 2,500, to 
4,800 pounds. Using the official claim of 4,800 pounds of ammonium nitrate 
would yield on the high end 1/2 million pounds per square inch (psi) at the 
detonation site. It is a basic laws of physics that the destructive potential of an 
explosion dramatically falls off even a few feet from a blast. Traveling through the 
air the first column hit would drop to 375 psi and to 25-38 psi at more distant 
columns. Concrete yield strength is 3,500 psi and pressure in the hundreds of 
thousands of psi would be required to cause the resulting damage, especially to 
reduce concrete to powder as occurred at some columns. The general concluded: 
"This is a classic cover-up of immense proportions." 

The WTC truck bomb with explosive power similar to the Oklahoma bomb- 
ing destroyed no support beams although some were quite close to the truck. The 
truck bomb in Oklahoma supposedly destroyed 20 to 30 main support beams that 
were 30 to 75 feet away. This is simply not possible. If the blast came from one 
origin the pattern of damage to the surrounding buildings would have been rather 
circular. Instead, the pattern of destruction was more linear and directed mainly at 
the federal building suggesting a sophisticated explosion. Building debris including 
reinforced steel was blown outward towards the street, which indicated a blast from 
inside the building. 

Ted Gunderson believes the main damage was caused by an electro-hydrody- 
namic gaseous fuel bomb developed by Michael Riconosciuto. The size of a 
pineapple it cost about $100,000 to build. It requires Q Clearance to build this 
secret device and only a few people in government have the technical ability to 
construct and use this devise. Riconosciuto's laboratory in Aberdeen, Washington 
was robbed in the late 1980s, and reportedly the signature from the Oklahoma 
bombing has been traced back to this laboratory. Gunderson prepared a report list- 
ing 15 reasons why an ammonium nitrate bomb couldn't have caused the resulting 
damage." Damage to nearby structures was more extensive than what you would 
expect from just ammonium nitrate, which is not that efficient. It makes a loud 
noise but doesn't pulverize material unless packed into the area for direct contact. 
That much ammonium nitrate would have made the area dangerous with nitric acid 
in the air, but this did not occur. The explosion left no soot and only a small 
amount of unexploded fertilizer was present, which means an expert set off the 
blast. While the FBI said the axle from the Ryder truck was found three blocks 
away, why did it blow upwards when the bomb, which was above the axle, made a 
30 foot crater, and a large ammonium nitrate truck bomb of this size would blow 
upwards and would not create a crater. 

Further investigation is needed to clarify these two views, although it appears 
that General Partin is correct that demolition charges were placed on various 
columns. It would be difficult for anyone to place such charges in a secure federal 
building, and this is one more sign that this was an inside job. One witness 
claims she saw someone culling into a column in the federal building several 
weeks before the explosion. When she walked over to the person, he covered his 
tools and said he was fixing up the building. 

It is one thing to use a small ammonium nitrate bomb as farmers often do to 
remove trees, but to blow up one involving 4,800 pounds with about 20 contain- 
ers linked together requires great technical ability. It is extremely difficult to build 
such a large device with numerous cannisters using home mixing equipment. The 
only way to have blast control with a 4,800 pound ammonium bomb would be 



The Oklahoma Bombing 207 



with volumetric initiation which requires sophisticated electronic circuits. Very 
few people have the training to build such bombs. The Albuquerque Journal said 
the ATF in mid-August, 1994 conducted tests blowing up car bombs made of 
ammonium nitrate and fuel oil at White Sands, New Mexico. Was this a trial run 
in preparation for the Oklahoma operation?" 

Two seismographs near the explosion clearly showed there were two or three 
explosions. Ray Brown, geologist for Oklahoma Geological Survey (OGS) at the 
University of Oklahoma in Norman, 16.25 miles from the explosion, initially 
said there were "two separate seismic events" and the simplest explanation is "two 
separate explosions." Dr. Brown believes that the second event could not be ex- 
plained by surface wave velocity dispersion, air waves, or air-coupled Rayleigh 
waves." ABC and other reporters visited the OSG, but this information was 
suppressed. 

The second event could not have been the building collapsing. The April 19 
blast had 60 million tons of concrete fall, while 200 million tons fell when the 
entire building was destroyed. Falling debris does not send the same high and low 
frequency waves as an explosion. Extensive seismograph equipment was used to 
record the demolition of the federal building. Equipment at Norman could barely 
record the demolition, unlike the clear record of the April 19 bombing, and the 
recording at the much closer Omniplex center was clearly different from the April 
19 bombing." Also, based on the laws of gravity the 11 seconds that separated the 
two blasts was too long a time period in a collapsing nine story building for the 
debris to have caused the second record on the seismograph. Steve Due, who oper- 
ates one of the local seismographs, believes the second explosion was a "chain- 
reaction detonation of explosive materials."" 

On June 1, 1995 the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) claimed there was only 
one bomb explosion April 19 and wrongly said the scientists at OGS all agreed 
with this conclusion. Dr. Charles Mankin, head of the OGS, urged that the June 1 
claim not be released until more evidence had been analyzed and, with other scien- 
tists, still feels the evidence suggests there were two blasts and that the USGS 
prematurely reached its conclusion." The experts in Oklahoma also rejected the 
claim that the two events were one wave traveling at different speeds. Was the 
USGS pressured to help in the cover-up? 

On November 20, 1995 at a meeting in Oklahoma City, Brown said he is 
now certain there were three explosions, and one of them was demolition charges, 
supporting General Partin's claims. Previously, Brown was not shown the com- 
plete seismograph record from the Omniplex center just 4.3 miles from the blast 
because it was seized by the FBI. In October, 1995 he obtained a better copy of the 
original seismograph, but the FBI still has the original and they won't release it to 
government geologists or to the defense attorneys who have been trying to obtain 
it. Brown and Tom Holzer, the government geologist at the meeting, agreed that 
they should see this original record to give a more complete analysis. Holzer said 
there may have been more than one explosion but this couldn't be proved. After 
the meeting, U.S. Prosecutor Ryan misquoted Holzer and said this conclusively 
confirms there was only one blast. 50 

An important factor in the bombing that has received little publicity is that 
the damage was much worse because munitions were illegally stored on the ninth 
floor of the federal building by DEA and ATF offices. The AP refused to carry 
stories published in the McCurtain Gazette about several illegal arsenal rooms in 



208 Treason The New World Order 



the Murrah building. Storing such material in office buildings violates state and 
federal laws. Munitions are only supposed to be stored in bunker-style arsenals. 
Information about the illegal arsenal rooms is being suppressed, partly because 
federal authorities are liable for huge damages in this criminal negligence. 2 ' The 
ATF is very worried about this, especially because in civil lawsuits broader dis- 
covery is allowed than in criminal lawsuits, and it would be much harder for 
federal authorities to withhold information. Already, local attorneys are exploring 
this; and Edye Smith, a mother who lost her two children in the blast, and her 
family have filed a wrongful death civil lawsuit against McVeigh. They plan to 
also sue the U.S. government. Of 462 federal employees affected by the bombing, 
all but Edye Smith and her mother-in-law were approved for workers compensa- 
tion. This is how the government treats people who stand up to it. 

Many believe the second explosion, which included the stored weapons, was 
more severe than the first. These munitions did not initially cause the blast but 
they made the resulting damage much worse and exemplify how the Feds have lied 
in this investigation. The arsenal room on the ninth floor collapsed onto the areas 
where the greatest number of casualties occurred, such as the day care center. The 
explosives included C-4 explosives, which will explode without a fuse under 
3,500 pounds of pressure as occurred when the building collapsed. The authorities 
have generally denied storing any weapons in the building, although the regional 
head of the ATF in Dallas, Lester Martz, blamed the DEA for the arsenal room." 
Cash believes there were four arsenal rooms in the Murrah building. 

After the initial explosions, the media said work was stopped several times to 
dismantle unexploded bombs. Police radios said the bomb squad found 
"undetonated military bombs" in the building. Explosive experts and a bomb-dis- 
posal truck were brought in. Many people near the federal building heard and felt 
several explosions. Witnesses also saw several five gallon containers of mercury 
fulminate inside the building. This volatile material could have collapsed the entire 
building. Bill Martin, of the Oklahoma City police, told Phil O'Halloran, a local 
reporter, about this discovery and then the department wouldn't discuss this report. 
Dick Miller, Oklahoma City assistant fire marshal, said high explosives such as 
an intact container marked "High Explosives" were moved from the building right 
after the blast. One initial rescuer a veteran heard live ammunition going past him 
from inside the building." 

After the explosion, some unexploded munitions remained on the ninth floor 
although much had fallen to the ground, so munitions were removed from both 
areas. One civilian helping to remove munitions from the building weeks after the 
blast saw hundreds of guns, including a five-gallon bucket of hand-grenades, in the 
building. Witnesses even saw an ATF agent remove a TOW (anti-tank missile) 
from the destroyed federal building. Several times, FBI and ATF agents got into 
arguments as to when the munitions should be removed from the building." 

The McCurtain Daily Gazelle obtained a film from the sheriff's department 
showing federal officials removing munitions from the federal building weeks after 
the explosion. On the film, the Feds yelled at the local police to leave the area. 
They did not want witnesses to see this evidence. This film confirms that there 
was an illegal arsenal room in the federal building. These munitions exploded in 
an area of the building where experts say the building could not have sustained so 
much damage from a truck bomb." 



The Oklahoma Bombing 209 



Rick Sherrow, an ex-ATF agent, said this is not the first time federal agents 
illegally stored munitions in a public building. In 1987 Soviet rocket fuses 
exploded during a fire at FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. After that, the 
ATF ordered federal officials across the U.S. to stop this illegal practice, but there 
have been other incidents." The Tulsa World reported in April, 1990 that IRS 
headquarters in Tulsa was robbed. The loot included ordinance and thousands of 
rounds of ammunition." 

It is also suspicious that the government rushed to destroy the entire building 
as they did at Waco, before independent tests could be conducted by outside 
experts. The government wouldn't even allow McVeigh's lawyer to take scrapings 
from various areas of the building. The damaged columns had chemical traces 
which would identify the explosives used in the bombing. Various architects, in- 
cluding Jim Loftis who designed the building, said it was structurally sound and 
did not have to be demolished although he and others were pressured by the gover- 
nor to support demolishing the building. Brig. General Partin and others tried to 
delay the building's destruction in order to conduct a thorough investigation. Partin 
wrote to various members of Congress saying "The damage pattern on the rein- 
forced concrete superstructure could not possibly have been attained from a single 
truck bomb without supplementing demolition charges at some of the reinforced 
column bases... .A careful examination of the collapsed column bases would 
readily reveal a failure mode produced by a demolition charge.... A separate and 
independent assessment should be made before a building demolition team destroys 
the evidence forever." Instead, the rubble was removed and buried underground with 
a fence around it to keep people out, and people at the site were told to not let 
anyone in to examine the debris. Is there something to hide here? Reportedly, the 
new judge may allow the defense access to the destroyed building. 

There is considerable evidence that the government had advance notice that a 
federal building, probably in the midwest, was going to be attacked. An informant 
told the U.S. Attorney in Denver, Henry Solano, that a federal building probably 
in Denver or the midwest was going to be attacked. ! " Conspirators included Amer- 
icans and people with Arabic names. This person was transporting drugs between 
L.A. and Kingman, Arizona. McVeigh, Michael Fortier, and Terry Nichols spent 
time in Kingman. Although supposedly not credible this person got a letter of 
immunity September 14, 1994 from the Justice Department, which is not pro- 
vided that easily. And the Feds spoke to him three times including as late as 
March, 1995. In early April he sent a letter to federal authorities in Denver 
warning that a federal building would be attacked within two weeks. Even after the 
bombing, the Feds still said this informant was considered unreliable, and he did 
not testify before the grand jury. 

On March 22, 1995 The Star-Ledger in Newark, N.J. published a report from 
Eduardo Gonzalex, head of the U.S. Marshals Service. A reliable source said there 
was going to be a terrorist attack against a federal courthouse or government 
facility in the U.S. in conjunction with the WTC trial, with the intent to kill 
many innocent people to attract press attention. The threat was considered very 
serious, and security was being increased throughout the U.S. On April 20, 1995 
the Israeli newspaper Yediol Ahronot headlined a story by Zadok Yehezkeli that, in 
recent days, U.S. intelligence officials received information originating in the 
Middle East about an imminent Islamic terrorist attack on U.S. soil. 



210 Treason The New World Order 



The initial trial judge, Wayne Alley, admitted to The Oregonian, the largest 
newspaper in Oregon, on April 20, 1995 that he had been warned of a possible 
terrorist attack several weeks before the bombing. Because of this, the judge stayed 
away from the court and his grandchildren were kept out of the day care center. He 
was probably removed from the case by a higher court because it would have been 
rather bizarre for the trial judge to openly acknowledged he was warned in advance 
about a terrorist attack, while the authorities denied there was any such warning." 
The defense had tried for months to disqualify Alley. Two days after it submitted 
the interview as evidence of his unsuitability he was removed by a higher court. 
The press refuses to discuss this interview and government prior knowledge of the 
bombing. 

The FBI called the Oklahoma City fire department on Friday, April 14, and 
warned of a terrorist threat in the area possibly in the next week. When a local 
investigator asked Assistant Chief Charles Gaines about this he denied receiving 
any warning. Then Chief Dispatcher Harvey Weathers confirmed they had received 
a message from the FBI to be alert to a bombing. When told about Gaines' com- 
ment, Weathers said: "I'm not going to lie for anyone. A lot of people don't want 
to get involved in this." Two other dispatchers confirmed Weathers' story. The 
Oklahoma City fire and police departments have since been ordered to not speak 
about the bombing, and inquiries must go through the city attorney. 

All Oklahoma City fire department communication tapes from that Friday 
until the bombing have been erased. This was called an error. When Channel 4 got 
the police log for the night before the bombing there were only two pages when 
normally it would be 12 to 15 pages. A public affairs official for the police de- 
partment acknowledged to a local investigator that pages were missing and that a 
court order would be needed to release them. Under Oklahoma law such records and 
tapes from the police and fire departments should be readily available. 

The media constantly refers to the Turner Diaries as the inspiration for right 
wing extremists to do the Oklahoma bombing. Yet the press ignores the fact that 
Martin Keating, brother of Oklahoma's governor Frank Keating, wrote a novel 
The Final Jihad in 1991, which much more accurately portrays the events of the 
Oklahoma bombing. This book described a federal building in Oklahoma being 
destroyed by someone named Tom McVay. The key suspect was stopped by an 
alert Oklahoma Highway Patrol officer. What are the odds of this novel's plot be- 
ing just a coincidence when compared to the actual events? While writing the 
novel Frank Keating, then a senior official in the Justice Department, introduced 
his brother to some FBI officials, including ex-FBI agent Oliver Revell, who 
served as a consultant to provide ideas for the project.'" 

In addition, when Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, was arrested, a well-read 
copy of Al Gore's book Earth In the Balance was found in his cabin. This was 
generally kept out of the news. I don't think this incident should be used to attack 
the entire environmental movement, but the same standard should exist with the 
militias. Instead the press falsely claimes The Turner Diaries was the Bible of the 
right, to demonize the militias. 

Various people report that ATF and DEA workers were told not to come to 
work that day because of a bomb threat On September 12, 1995, KFOR TV in- 
terviewed three witnesses who spoke with an ATF agent on the street just after the 
explosion who admitted no ATF agents were in the building during the blast 
because they had been warned to not come to work that day. At least four indepen- 



The Oklahoma Bombing 211 



dent witnesses saw the local bomb squad at a parking lot by the Murrah building 
between 7:30-8:30 a.m. shortly before the blast. Norma Smith told her relatives in 
Texas about this." Attorney Daniel Adomitis told the Fort Worth Star/Telegram 
that he saw a bomb squad by the county courthouse at 7:30 a.m. the morning of 
the blast. Other witnesses saw a bomb squad by the IRS building that morning. 
The government denies all these reports." 

Pat Briley's wife works with the wives of two FBI agents, including Dan 
Vogel, and minutes after the bombing they called their husbands, and then said the 
FBI knew in advance about the bombing. Two days later they said they shouldn't 
have admitted this, and the conversation should not be repeated. In the days before 
the bombing, Dana Cooper, director of the day care center, who was killed in the 
blast, received numerous bomb threats, which she reported to several government 
agencies. At 9 a.m. sharp, some FBI agents normally brought their children to the 
day care center, while they conducted business in the building, but this wasn't done 
the day of the blast. 

Although 15 to 17 ATF agents were assigned to the federal building in Okla- 
homa, none were in the building during the blast. Despite claims that some of 
them were injured or killed, no such victims were ever identified. The U.S. News 
& World Report, August 14, 1995, published the names of all the identified 
Oklahoma bombing victims with photos for most of them. No ATF, DEA, or 
FBI agents were listed here. Although there was massive media coverage of the 
Oklahoma bombing, few of the injured were interviewed. Victims like Judy Morse 
realized a bomb exploded inside the building, and the government didn't want the 
public to hear such reports. When Edye Smith asked, on CNN May 23, 1995, 
why no one from the ATF was in the building, a shocked announcer cut her off 
and the press didn't pursue this. 

Lester Martz, regional head of the ATF in Dallas, on May 23, 1995 said ATF 
agent Alex McCauley and a DEA agent fell five stories in a free fall from the 
eighth to the third floor in an elevator during the explosion, and they managed to 
open the stuck door to escape. ATF head John Magaw repeated this story the next 
day on CNN. However, the company that inspects the elevators happened to have 
two inspectors across the street when the blast occurred. With a government 
inspector, they immediately examined the elevators, and they confirmed that the 
ATF story was not possible. Repairman Duane James called it pure fantasy. None 
of the doors were forced open and safety switches to prevent excessive speed 
remained in place. No elevator had a free fall which was impossible unless a cable 
was cut, which did not happen.' 1 

This bombing is not the first instance of a terrorist attack in which the U.S. 
government had advance warning that was kept from the public. Previously it was 
reported that the U.S. knew in advance of a terrorist threat to Pan Am, and there 
was even a warning posted at an American Embassy. In the months after the 
destruction of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, many were angry at the gov- 
ernment because this warning wasn't openly published. In July, 1995 the London 
Guardian said the State Department received a warning three weeks in advance that 
there would be an attack against Pan Am and U.S. military bases. 

In late October, 1995, Hoppy Heidelberg a member of the grand jury that 
indicted McVeigh publicly complained that U.S. prosecutors were intimidating the 
grand jury refusing even to present witnesses who saw John Doe 2. About John 
Doe 2, in transcripts released by the defense, Heidelberg said: "I'm satisfied that I 



212 Treason The New World Order 



know the government knows who he is." Heidelberg said this person was a gov- 
ernment agent or informant. "Either way. ..they had prior knowledge to the 
bombing, and that's what they cannot afford. ..to have come out." FBI agents went 
to Heidelberg's home and showing a gun confiscated his juror notes. When 
Heidelberg tried to get a copy of those notes, as allowed under the FOIA, the 
government refused to comply. When grand jurors wanted to directly question 
witnesses, prosecutors removed the witness from the room and after getting 
questions from the jurors asked such questions in their own words. This is quite 
unusual and represents serious misconduct by prosecutors. According to the federal 
grand jury handbook the government is supposed to assist, not block, a grand juror 
in a search for the truth. A grand jury is an independent body that serves as a check 
against an overzealous prosecutor." 

After complaining to the judge in early October, 1995, Heidelberg was re- 
moved from the grand jury and threatened with jail and a fine if he spoke up. His 
removal was partly based on an interview he had with an FBI agent. It is 
extremely rare for a grand juror to break the oath of secrecy, which is illegal, and 
publicly make such complaints. One expert said it only happens once every few 
decades. The government falsely claimed that Heidelberg was a militia radical. Just 
after Heidelberg was removed from the grand jury, Rep. Key on October 26, 1995 
started gathering 1,000 signatures to have a county grand jury. He warned that 
"criminal obstruction of justice charges could be levied against any person or 
persons who have destroyed documents related" to the bombing. Although quite 
unusual, a judge has twice turned down the request for a grand jury and the decision 
has been appealed. In June, 1995 relatives of the bombing victims petitioned 
Congress to hold an investigation. 

On November 3, 1995 The Dallas Morning News wrote an editorial that 
Heidelberg should be held in contempt. USA Today attacked Heidelberg in an 
article entitled "A 'Terrible' Turn in Bomb Case.'" 5 Is it more terrible that the 
government is covering up evidence about such a crime, or that one juror had the 
integrity to speak out? In November, 1995 U.S. prosecutor Patrick Ryan told the 
Daily Oklahoman anyone who disagreed with the government's version of the case 
was being unpatriotic. He said independent investigators were "extremists who 
want to somehow harm this country." The British couldn't have said it better over 
200 years ago! As in a communist country, if you challenge the parly line you are 
an enemy of the people. That a brave person speaks out in the name of truth is not 
acceptable to the government and our corporate controlled media. 

The indictments, which didn't describe a motive, made it clear the Feds believe 
others are involved. "Others unknown to the grand jury" were described.'" How- 
ever, Time called the indictment "A Two-Bit Conspiracy" involving just two 
drifters with no broad conspiracy." Nichol's lawyer, Michael Tigar, requested a 
hearing to explore government misconduct. There have been various leaks of 
information that are often false, federal authorities have prevented witnesses from 
speaking with defense attorneys, and they have provided information to the press 
while withholding it from the defense. 

The Rocky Mountain News said on March 29, 1996 that FBI agent White- 
hurst believes the FBI is illegally withholding evidence that is hurting the 
McVeigh defense. He wrote a letter last November saying: "I will consider it an 
obstruction of justice and will testify in court to that opinion. ..if that information 
is suppressed by the Department of Justice and/or the FBI." This evidence involves 



The Oklahoma Bombing 213 



the testimony of another FBI agent that residue from the explosion had been found 
in McVeigh's shirt. At a pretrial evidentiary hearing on April 9, 1996, the U.S. 
prosecutor admitted that Whitehurst tested this shirt and found no chemical residue 
from the bombing. Reportedly, nine FBI agents have signed declarations support- 
ing Whitehurst's statements about government misconduct in the Oklahoma 
bombing investigation. The judge in the case sealed these documents but they 
were leaked. 

Witnesses have even been intimidated by the government. People who made 
statements different from the approved version have been so criticized that certain 
witnesses are afraid to come forward. Some witnesses are afraid to lose their 
pension. A safety officer in the federal building saw McVeigh in the building 
several weeks before the blast, and had information that could explain who owned 
the leg found in the rubble. He was told to shut up or his reputation would be 
ruined. After Heidelberg was dismissed from the grand jury, a reporter made an 
appointment by phone to see him. The Assistant U.S. Attorney for the case then 
reportedly called and told Heidelberg if he saw this person he'd be go to jail. This 
is another sign of widespread phone wiretaps. One person, seriously injured in the 
blast, has important information that sharply differs from the government story. 
An FBI agent came to her door and said an LA. Times reporter was coming to her 
place and she would be in serious trouble if she spoke to him. Ten minutes later 
there was a knock at the door, which she refused to answer. Later by her door she 
saw a card from an LA. Times reporter. By the spring of 1996, federal agents 
revisited certain witnesses to harass them into changing their stories. 

McVeigh's lawyer, Stephen Jones, asked the court to force the CIA to release 
secret records about the Oklahoma bombing. Reportedly, he did this because the 
military secretly released records to him showing the involvement of the CIA and 
foreign nationals in causing the Oklahoma bombing. If this were obtained through 
the court it would probably be entered as evidence during the trial, but naturally 
the government cried national security to block this request. Jones appears to now 
understand that much is involved in this trial. He spoke of a broader conspiracy 
with McVeigh being only a foot soldier." He has spoken of foreign nationals 
being involved in the plot, his investigators have spoken to people like Ted 
Gunderson, and there are signs Jones may mount a defense involving some of the 
evidence discussed here that is being covered up. In November, 1995 Jones told 
reporters when they know what he has learned about the government's role in the 
bombing, they would never again have the same view about the government and 
the way government intelligence works. McVeigh's sister in 1994 told a reporter 
at the Spotlight that her brother worked for the ATF. According to Heidelberg, 
during the grand jury proceedings, McVeigh's sister read a letter from her brother 
in which he claimed to be a member of a U.S. military Special Forces Group 
conducting criminal activity." This important revelation has received little 
publicity. 

However, it is difficult to believe the government will allow information on 
its involvement in the bombing to be presented in open court. The Feds will go to 
any extreme to continue the cover-up. Jones has complained about the location of 
the trial but it remains to be seen how serious he will be in challenging the gov- 
ernment's case. Jones barely attempted to delay the federal building's destruction. 
Attorney John De Camp was prepared to file for a 30-day delay in the demolition 
as a lawyer for a victim. Jones contacted De Camp and asked him to back down 



214 Treason The New World Order 



because he would be in a better legal position to get this delay. De Camp agreed, 
also releasing his bomb expert, as Jones requested. Then Jones only asked for a 
48-hour delay, he didn't use this bomb expert, and the defense agreed not to even 
take soil samples to investigate. De Camp was stunned. A defense lawyer in a 
criminal investigation has a right and duty to examine evidence at the scene of the 
crime. At the same time, in fairness to Jones, the rapid destruction of this evidence 
may provide grounds for an appeal. 

Many similar cases in the past were settled before a trial took place, such as 
the killing of the Kennedys, Martin L King, and John Lennon. It is quite possible 
McVeigh and Nichols will be killed, an out-of-court settlement will be made, or 
the lawyers for the defendants will back off and not present certain evidence. Dur- 
ing a trial, it would be a public relations disaster for the government if the truth 
came out. It remains to be seen what Jones will actually reveal in a trial. 
Gunderson said the security for McVeigh when he was initially moved was "very 
poor, sloppy, an open invitation for someone to kill him." Authorities refused to 
even give McVeigh a bullet-proof vest when he was initially moved, and no one 
knows how the crowd knew who he was and when he was being moved. In late 
August, 1995 the security chief where McVeigh and Nichols were jailed was 
removed after he attempted to increase security around them. Some investigators 
believe McVeigh was supposed to die in the blast, and this makes sense. 

In a crime like the Oklahoma bombing with an on-going cover-up there are 
many loose ends. Why were thousands of elite Iraqi troops quietly moved to the 
U.S? Why did the government give immunity to the Denver informant and then, 
even after he was quite accurate, still ignore him? What is the relationship be- 
tween the secret government and the foreign terrorists who may be involved in the 
bombing? The exact role of the U.S. government in this cover-up has not yet been 
clarified. When McVeigh was arrested, the officer's video recorded the license plate 
of a truck owned by Steve Colburn. He was arrested May 13, 1995 but nothing 
further has been heard about him. The unidentified leg found in the federal building 
was identified as belonging to a white male. Then the Feds said it belonged to a 
black woman. It is not that difficult for forensic experts to determine the sex and 
race of a victim. 

A German friend of McVeigh's Andreas Strassmeir, may be involved in the 
bombing. Several witnesses claim Strassmeir was with McVeigh in Junction 
City, Kansas shortly before the bombing, and Strassmeir may soon be named in 
the Smith family's civil lawsuit. Coming from a prominent political family in 
Germany, he became a German officer with intelligence training in 1989 and then 
moved to the U.S. to visit KKK and neo-Nazis supporters. Phone records show 
that McVeigh and Strassmeir communicated including possibly on April 5 and 18, 
1995, and Strassmeir admits meeting McVeigh. In December, 1993 the FBI said 
German and U.S. intelligence agencies would work together to limit the influence 
of Nazis in each country. This included surveillance of certain Americans. For 
years the government has used foreign agents to perform illegal acts in the U.S. to 
avoid being detected. Strassmeir admitted to the London Sunday Telegraph that he 
first lived in the U.S. in 1989 because he planned to work for the U.S. Justice 
Department on a special assignment. 4 " The McCurtain Daily Gazelle obtained an 
FBI memorandum dated April 26, 1995 that an imprisoned White Aryan 
Resistance (WAR) member had met McVeigh several years ago with John Doe 2 



The Oklahoma Bombing 215 



who was a German national." On February 4, 1996 the Sunday Times of London 
said British and German extremists may be linked to the bombing. 42 

Strassmeir fled to Germany after the McCurtain Daily Gazette started writing 
about his possible involvement with McVeigh and the bombing and suggested he 
may be an undercover intelligence agent. His U.S. attorney Kirk Lyons confirmed 
that he returned to Germany through Mexico with the help of GSG-9, the German 
military counter-terrorist unit of which he is a member, reportedly because of death 
threats." A warrant for Strassmeir's arrest for overstaying a tourist visa was never 
served, although the FBI received a copy of the warrant. In February, 1992, when 
Strassmeir's car was impounded, the State Department and governor's office called 
and said he had diplomatic immunity. 

Cash received help in his investigation by someone from Interpol frustrated 
with the U.S. governments refusal to investigate various white supremists. In 
Tulsa, Cash visited Dennis Mahon, a leader of WAR, a former Ku Klux Klan 
leader, and a friend of Strassmeirs. Mahon and his brother own a sporty 1973 
Chevrolet pickup similar to a vehicle the FBI was looking for immediately after 
the bombing. During the visit, Cash also spoke to Mark Thomas, leader of the 
Pennsylvania WAR, and he admitted being at Elohim City days before the bomb- 
ing. Also discussed at the meeting was Mike Brescia, another WAR member and 
roommate of Strassmeirs at Elohim City. At least one witness has identified 
Mahon as driving with McVeigh the morning of the bombing. McVeigh's lawyer 
confirmed that, although it had questioned 11,000 people, the FBI had not 
questioned any of these people about their possible involvement in the bombing, 
although Mahon did give a deposition in Edye Smith's lawsuit. A member of the 
WAR, Richard Snell, was executed in prison by the government on April 19, 
1995 hours after the bombing." The Denver Post quoted Arkansas prison guard 
Alan Ablies as saying: "Snell repeatedly predicted that there would be a bombing 
or an explosion the day of his death." 

On May 21, 1995 Reuters News Agency said Newsweek had information the 
government "pretty well knew who was involved in the April 19 blast, and that 
husbands and wives as well as children as young as 12, were going to be arrested 
at" Elohim City, a white supremist compound in Oklahoma. "The major players, 
already targeted by the FBI, were talking to investigators to get lighter sentences," 
and a government informant had provided information on the bombing. The gov- 
ernment usually has informants in targeted groups. On May 21, 1995 WUSA in 
Boston profiled the Newsweek story, but this report was suspended and not widely 
disseminated. Newsweek only ran a watered-down story on May 29, 1995. 
McVeigh, Michael Fortier, and Terry Nichols visited Elohim City many times 
while Strassmeir lived there for some months, and no one could confirm Strass- 
meir's alibi during the bombing. 4 ' On October 12, 1993 McVeigh got a speeding 
ticket a few miles from Elohim City on the road to the village. 

Reportedly, the extensive investigation by the Smith family, discussed above, 
has led them to conclude that Mike Brescia is John Doe 2. Eyewitnesses place 
Brescia with McVeigh in Junction City, Kansas shortly before the bombing. Just 
after the composite of John Doe 1 was released, before McVeigh was publically 
identified, a women in Kansas told the FBI John Doe 1 was McVeigh, who she 
had dated and John Doe 2 was Brescia, who a friend had dated. Amazingly, the FBI 
refused to even interrogate Brescia even though he remained at Elohim City for 
months after the bombing until the press started asking about him. Then he 



216 Treason The New World Order 



disappeared and no one is sure where he is today. Strassmeir is going to be named 
in the Smith lawsuit as a "U.S. federal informant with material knowledge of the 
bombing." 

Lester Martz, regional head of the ATF, confirmed that there was a sting 
operation the night before the bombing, but he wouldn't confirm if the sting 
operation was related to the bombing." Rep. Key also said someone involved in 
the sting operation confirmed its existence to him. Reportedly, there were ATF 
agents on a stake out of the Murrah building at 3:30 a.m., and they had a tracking 
device. At 4:30 a.m. these agents set up a road block two miles from the Murrah 
building, and other agents were probably watching another near by federal build- 
ing. Some feel they were following McVeigh's car with a transmitter, and that 
McVeigh and his friends were going to be arrested before the blast, or the blast 
was supposed to occur early in the morning when no one was in the building. 
Others feel that because the sting operation failed, the Feds are trying to cover-up 
their advanced knowledge. Or the failed sting operation may have been a deliberate 
cover to carry out the actual bombing. 

The WTC bombing involved an FBI informant working with terrorists possi- 
bly trained by the CIA. About the Oklahoma bombing Strassmeir said, "The ATF 
had an informant inside this operation. They had advance warning and they bungled 
it."" In the New York and Oklahoma, officials openly admit that they haven't yet 
found the masterminds of the crime and aren't sure how funds were obtained to 
support the bombing. 4 " In each case, authorities claimed they were able to arrest 
people within a few days, because the vehicle ID number of the truck involved in 
the bombing was found, but this was false. The Feds already knew who they were 
looking for in New York. The vehicle identification number (VIN) of the Ryder 
truck supposedly led investigators to McVeigh, but GM said the VIN is not on the 
rear axle as claimed, and Ryder confirmed that it doesn't add VINs to its trucks. In 
each case, no one in Congress has demanded an explanation for the many discrep- 
ancies in these cases. Several congressional aides told one investigator that 
Congress would not permit hearings on the Oklahoma bombing, partly because 
they were afraid it would so undermine federal law enforcement that it might 
jeopardize passage of the Anti-Terrorism bill. 

The many inconsistencies in the Oklahoma bombing raise serious questions 
about the integrity of the government's case. Why does the national media and 
progressive press refuse to discuss this government misconduct? If there was no 
federal involvement in the Oklahoma bombing, why are they covering up the 
facts? The government won't interview many witnesses because they would start 
talking about other people who they saw with McVeigh. Several private invest- 
igators believe the CIA was definitely involved with foreign nationals and 
American KKK/neo-Nazis members working together. During the Gulf War 
German Nazis openly supported Iraq, so it is quite possible Middle Eastern and 
German terrorists work together on certain operations. Hopefully, the rule of law 
will be reestablished in America so that the perpetrators of this atrocity can be 
arrested and brought to trial. 



217 



Chapter XVII 

Recent Attacks on the 
Militias and Patriot Movement 



"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave and hated and 
scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to 
be a patriot." 

Mark Twain 

"These are times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot 
will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it 
now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not 
easily conquered...." 

Thomas Paine 



As many are aware, in recent years thousands of Americans have joined unen- 
rolled militias in many states. Militia units should be set up across the country to 
protect the people, as was the intent of the Founders. People should consider 
joining armed militia units to train, study, assist the people during emergencies, 
and to more effectively get involved in politics. If more raids like the Waco 
massacre take place, there will be an explosion of membership in the militias. 
Many state codes have laws allowing for general unorganized or unenrolled 
militias, but their role today is not well defined. In 1946 Virginia ordered its 
unenrolled militia to restore peace in a labor dispute. They are still regarded as a 
reserve source of manpower for the state National Guard and the Army. However, 
the National Guard, not the unenrolled state militias, are seen as the main source 
of manpower for the Army. 

Many people joining militia units belong to the Patriot movement which 
exists in every state. People in this populist movement are often not armed. The 
movement includes constitutionalists, homeschoolers, tax protesters, progressives, 
New Agers, and Christian fundamentalists. Many would benefit by attending its 
meetings. While the Patriot movement is rather large, it has received little nation- 
al media coverage even after the Oklahoma bombing. The militia movement is 
just the tip of the iceberg of a broad-based movement involving millions of people 
determined to restore constitutional government. Many people are joining the 
Patriot movement to stop the coming one world government, because so many 
things written about it for years are now actually happening. 

The national media have continuously attacked the militias and patriots link- 
ing them to racism, anti-Semitism, and white supremacists like the Aryan Nation, 
although there is little evidence of this. The press often says the militias consist 
of angry white men; yet many Jews, blacks, and women belong to the move- 
ment.' The San Francisco Chronicle said, while groups that watch extremist orga- 



218 Treason The New World Order 



nizations have claimed "the militia movement is linked to dangerous right-wing 
ideologies, they offer little supporting evidence." The article said militia members 
"engage in voter registration drives, assist local law enforcement agencies in flood 
relief efforts and other emergencies." This is what the Missouri militia did during 
recent flooding.' 

Most people in the militias and Patriot movement have no prejudice against 
any race or color,' although there have been some generally unsuccessful attempts 
by racists to infiltrate militia units. In one incident, a militia unit in Fort Bragg, 
California was offered 1,500 acres for training. A check revealed that the man was 
a white supremacist, so the offer was rejected. 4 Sheriff Dupont said white 
supremacists in his Montana county initially tried to influence the local militia as 
it formed, but they were totally rejected. 5 According to the U.S. News & World 
Report, a few people from right wing groups have joined militia units, "but law 
enforcement officials believe most recruits are simply disenchanted with what they 
consider the growing intrusion of government into their lives."* When a few 
skinheads and neo-Nazis attended a Missouri militia meeting, they were thrown 
out, as was the person who said he could build landmines. This unit states in its 
manual that it will not tolerate racism or criminal behavior.' 

Time said many militias throw out racists and some militias have minority 
members. James Aho, author of The Politics of Righteousness and a sociologist 
who has interviewed 368 people in the radical right, said "The vast majority of 
people in the militias are not violent or dangerous."" Most people in these groups 
are middle-class, law-abiding citizens who realize how dangerous the federal gov- 
ernment has become. There is also a growing interaction between the Patriot 
movement and black nationalists. Many black Americans understand the danger of 
corporate domination and government abuses of power.* 

While most people in the secret government are Christian, some are Jewish, 
and some claim there is a Jewish plot to control the world. The real religion of all 
these people is money and power. There is no Jewish conspiracy, just as there is 
no Christian conspiracy. To attack the religious views of a few bankers is morally 
reprehensible and provides no real insight into what is actually taking place. At- 
tacking the secret government as a Jewish plot also falls into a trap, because then 
you are being anti-Semitic and that becomes the whole issue instead of actually 
analyzing the secret government. Even Jewish patriots who attack the secret gov- 
ernment are called anti-Semitic. This is a classic example of attacking the mess- 
enger to avoid an intelligent discussion of the message. This strategy is another 
layer of protection the corporate elite use to keep the public from learning about 
their evil deeds. People like Henry Kissinger are promoted partly so people will 
see a Jewish conspiracy and be attacked on that basis, while the real work of the 
secret government is not even discussed. On February 2, 1995, the New York 
Review of Books reviewed Pat Robertson's book, The New World Order. While 
this book describes in great detail the history and plans of the corporate elite to 
establish the one world government, Robertson also mentioned certain Jewish 
individuals. The reviewer barely explored the theme of Robertson's book. Instead 
the review focused on the "question of whether Robertson was an anti-Semite." 

Members of the secret government who claim to be Jewish are far less than a 
fraction of one percent of the millions of Jews throughout the world, most of 
whom have no interest or even knowledge of a secret government desiring world 
domination. It is morally wrong to slander an entire race because of the evil deeds 



Recent Attacks on the Militias and Patriot Movement 215 



of a few people. "A tragic canard, the Jewish conspiracy merits no further com- 
ment. Its existence, however, tends to unfairly discredit other conspiratorial inter- 
pretations of events that have nothing to do with making scapegoats of any ethnic 
or religious group." 1 " While some people use anti-Semitic or racist remarks to 
attack the bankers, that is a minority view that offends most people in the militias 
and Patriot movement. One reason there is very little anti-Semitism in the Patriot 
movement and militias is because there are so many Jewish members. The 100- 
man militia unit in San Diego has a Jewish membership of 50 percent. Jews For 
the Preservation of Firearms has thousands of members, Nancy Lord, a Jewish 
attorney, represents members of the movement throughout the nation, and I am 
one more of thousands of Jewish members of the Patriot movement. 

The national media often uses quotes from critics of the right, like Morris 
Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which calls the militias dan- 
gerous with ties to "hate-mongering groups," but they provide little evidence of 
this. The SPLC sent information to the U.S. Justice Department in October, 1994 
about the supposedly dangerous militias, but the Justice Department until recently 
took no legal action because it received no evidence of illegal activity. The SPLC 
also wrote to many state attorney generals in May, 1995 asking that existing laws 
be applied to stop the militias. By April, 1996 no state had taken action against 
any militia, because most militia members follow the law. The Idaho Deputy 
Attorney General said people in the militias should not be cut off from the 
political process. 

The SPLC is one of the wealthiest non-profit organizations in America. On 
April 25, 1986 The Montgomery Advertiser said Dees's entire staff of five lawyers 
and his top aide resigned because they were surprised to learn that the center's goal 
was to enrich Dees, not to help poor people. An ex-attorney for the center Deborah 
Ellis said: "I felt that Morris (Dees) was on a Klan kick because it was such an 
easy target — easy to beat in court, easy to raise big money on." Now it is the turn 
of the militias, so the SPLC can reach $100 million in assets. In 1993, the 
American Institute of Philanthropy, a watchdog over charities, gave the SPLC a 
low D grade because of its poor use of funds. Several times the SPLC has been 
accused of discrimination. On December 28, 1994 The Montgomery Advertiser re- 
ported that 12 former black employees experienced racial problems at the SPLC. 
In 1958 Dees supported George Wallace partly because he supported segregation. 
In the Joan Little case, Dees was dismissed by the judge after he was accused of 
trying to get a witness to commit perjury. Millard Farmer, a Georgia lawyer and 
ex-partner of Dees, sued and won after Dees cheated him out of $50,000. 

Kenneth Stern, in A Force Upon the Plain, constantly claimed that arrested 
individuals had militia ties but usually no proof of this was offered. Guilt by 
innuendo is the mark of the government, the national press, and professional 
critics of the right. In Loud Hawk, published in 1994, Stern revealed that he was a 
lawyer for the militant American Indian Movement from 1975 to 1988. Harshly 
critical of the government, his phones were wiretapped and he was followed at 
times. Stern admitted that as a young lawyer he "would have thought bombing 
property was almost romantic, a sign of defiance...." Stern never denounced acts of 
violence by the left. In 1988 he established the National Organization Against 
Terrorism and, with the support of ex-CIA head George Bush and ex-intelligence 
officer Arthur Goldberg, he became a successful lawyer with many establishment 
connections. Who is the real Kenneth Stern? 



220 Treason The New World Order 



Some phony experts now attacking the right are operatives working for the 
government or large corporations, others on their own or in conjunction with cer- 
tain private groups, attack any action considered right wing, while some of these 
people are simply confused individuals making a living. Often these people make 
wildly exaggerated claims about the militias as a vehicle to raise money and en- 
hance their importance. Morris Dees identified an 86-year-old woman in Colorado 
as a radical militia leader. His list of militia groups in Colorado and many other 
states was devoid of reality, but he has raised millions of dollars because of the 
supposed militia threat. 

Professional critics of the right often name leaders of the Klan, neo-Nazis, and 
white supremacists as being leaders of the militias and Patriot movement. In 
January, 1996, the editor of Media Bypass rejected an ad from a Klan group and 
readers supported this. I listen to patriot talk radio for hours each day. It is ex- 
tremely rare for someone to call such shows and promote white supremacist or 
racist views. About once a month, I do hear such a caller, and most programs cut 
them off. A popular patriot radio station, the USA Freedom Network, has a 
Jewish owner and several Jewish announcers. I have never once heard a radio 
announcer or guest promoting racist or anti-Semitic views. The objective observer 
can easily confirm this. 

I am not saying that there are no racists in the militias and Patriot movement, 
but such involvement is minimal and it is a lie to claim otherwise. Attend a Pre- 
paredness Expo that takes place in various states, and you will not see any hate 
groups." Even Chip Berlet, an extreme leftist who follows the movement, said 
that people in this movement are not especially racist or anti-Semitic but are part 
of a broader movement." There are people in white supremacist groups who 
criticize the federal government and want the Constitution restored, just as 
members of these groups hold racial purity views. I am aware of one Christian 
Identity newspaper that presents patriotic themes. While some racist groups would 
probably like to bring in new members from the Patriot movement, they also 
harshly criticize the militias because militia members are not white supremacists. 
Jonathan Karl, author of The Right to Bear Arms, interviewed Aryan Nations' 
leader Richard Butler in the New York Post. Butler said the militias were traitors 
to the white race, and militias were a government-sponsored movement, maybe 
working with the CIA. As Karl told me, he is aware that the militias are not part 
of white supremacist, Klan, or neo-Nazi groups. Karl was on CNN, where he now 
works, just after the Freeman surrendered. He said only a small, small minority of 
militia members are white supremacists. 

The hysterical media attack on the militias after the Oklahoma bombing was a 
propaganda barrage that had little to do with reality. People who think there is a 
free press in America are in a state of denial or are ignoring the evidence. In a free 
society, there would be at least some diverse opinion in the national press. The 
orders were given and there was a constant hysterical attack on the militias. How 
can you demonize the militias when the Nichols brothers attended one or two 
meetings of the Michigan Militia and were then thrown out because of their radical 
views! McVeigh denied being involved with the militias when interviewed and no 
one has ever presented proof to dispute this, yet to this day, critics of the right 
still blame the militias for the Oklahoma bombing, even though they provide no 
proof of this. The FBI has not arrested any militia member for the Oklahoma 
bombing. 



Recent Attacks on the Militias and Patriot Movement 221 



In the gleeful rush to attack the right, proof of militia involvement in the 
Oklahoma attack was not necessary. James Ridgeway, in a April 25, 1995 Village 
Voice article, linked the militias to the Oklahoma bombing by using words like 
"It is probable" and "there is every reason to believe." Guess work and personal 
beliefs replaced professional journalism. It suddenly became politically correct to 
blame the militias for everything, from property rights issues to bombing 
abortion clinics. I went to one meeting where the speaker, a private investigator, 
spent 10 minutes blaming the militias for attacks on environmentalists and then 
acknowledged there was no proof of this. Over and over again, in the national 
media when the militias are discussed, there is typically one expert and one or 
more reporters who are extremely hostile to the militias. Only on occasion is there 
a rational discussion with opposing views presented. 

In some instances, the media blatantly distorted the truth to attack the militias 
and Patriot movement. On April 27, 1995 ABC's Day One showed a headline of 
the Resister magazine describing the U.S. military's Combat Arms Survey which 
suggested U.S. soldiers might shoot citizens who refused to surrender their arms. 
The reporter called this right wing extremism instead of noting this was a U.S. 
government survey. The Progressive, Harpers, and several TV shows took Bo 
Gritz's words out of context and falsely claimed he supported the Oklahoma 
bombing, when the opposite was true. The press including Time, the Wall Street 
Journal," the Village Voice on May 23, 1995, and many other publications quoted 
two local liberal reporter who falsely claimed that Sam Sherwood, head of the 
U.S. Militia Association in Idaho, had said a civil war may be coming and you 
may need to shoot legislators. Sherwood strongly denied stating this. He lived on 
a kibbutz in Israel, and the Idaho militia is extremely conservative in its actions. 
Unlike the ranting press, Mack Tanner, a retired U.S. diplomat, who wrote a de- 
tailed article on the militias in Reason, was at the meeting when Sherwood spoke. 
Tanner heard the opposite of what the press claimed. Sherwood asked that political 
action, not violence, be used to correct improper government policies." 

One result of the propaganda attack on the militias is that many people mis- 
takenly look at the militias as a great danger, when the exact opposite is true. The 
militias exist in a defensive mode, formed in response to an increasingly oppres- 
sive government. Who is the real threat in America — people who call for a return 
to constitutional government, or a government that seizes property from hundreds 
of thousands of citizens and whose agents break into people's homes without due 
process even killing innocent citizens? If a militia threatens violence or is accused 
of violence, it may be an FBI operative, like John Parsons and the Tri-State 
Militia, when they threatened war with the federal government. 

On July 30, 1995, Rep. Schumaker said regarding Clinton's involvement in 
the Waco raid: "Before you make some allegations. ..have some facts." This advice 
should apply to all Americans. Instead, opposition to government policies is 
called unpatriotic and racist. Amazingly Clinton said May 5, 1995: "You cannot 
be a patriot and despise your government." He would probably consider the 
Founders dangerous radicals. Clinton obviously has no understanding of our his- 
tory. It has long been part of our heritage to be suspicious of state power. 
"Clinton has sought to intimidate critics of government policy by branding them 
as terrorists. ...Loud voices are not the same as violent deeds....Wide open debate is 
the best chance for restraining violent impulses. ...Information is the enemy both 
of out-of-control government and of paranoia. Vigorous, open dissent is a power- 



222 Treason The New World Order 



ful check on government excesses — and an important, peaceful outlet for citizen 
grievances."" 

Clinical Psychiatry News said government critics were suffering from 
"government-phobia." Supposedly, this recently discovered disorder has become an 
epidemic, with people becoming delusional and even psychotic. On May 3, 1996, 
NBC's Unsolved Mysteries, in a story on the Freemen, referred to a "pathological 
fear of the government." As in the Soviet Union, if you disagree with the 
government, you must be crazy. People like George Washington would be put in 
mental hospitals." With tens of millions of people supporting the Patriot move- 
ment, the objective observer should consider whether there is mass hysteria, or are 
things happening in America that you should examine! 

USA Today and CNN reported a Gallop poll on April 23-24, 1995, showing 
that 39 percent of the people felt immediately threatened by the federal govern- 
ment." They were surprised at this high number, so they conducted another poll 
dropping the word "immediate" and were shocked to see the percent rise to 52 per- 
cent." The Los Angeles Times conducted a similar poll and found that 45 percent 
felt threatened by the federal government. Thomas Jefferson said: "When people 
fear the government, you have tyranny, but when government fears the people, 
you have liberty." A USA Today reporter said the newspaper didn't understand 
what was happening, but the militias appeared to represent a political movement 
that had not previously been identified by the politicians and national media." 

On May 18, 1995 the Washington Post, in a poll conducted with ABC News, 
revealed that one in eight Americans (32 million) support the goals and activities 
of the militias and that six percent (15 million) of Americans consider the federal 
government the enemy." The Patriot movement, which is much bigger than the 
militias, represents many more people, and this poll underestimated the true feel- 
ings of the country, because it was conducted just after the Oklahoma bombing 
during a massive campaign to demonize the militias. 

You may be surprised to hear about these polls, because they received little 
publicity. These four polls involve five of the most prestigious news organiza- 
tions in the U.S. That so many fear and distrust the government should make the 
objective observer explore what is really happening to our Republic. At what 
point do views held by tens of millions of people stop being called extremist or 
racist? At what point do supposedly extremist views become reasonable opinions 
when such views are held by millions of people? The anger and hostility that tens 
of millions of Americans feel towards the federal government is much broader and 
deeper than the Washington crowd and the national media will acknowledge, 
although many Republicans understand the popularity of the Patriot movement. 
The only Republican in Congress to harshly attack the militias was Rep. Peter 
King. He was shocked to be so criticized and his office was flooded with hundreds 
of angry letters and calls." 

Progressives joined in the rush to demonize the right after the Oklahoma 
bombing. For years, the left tried to rally the people to counteract the increasing 
power of the large corporations. Now that a powerful, populist, middle-class 
movement led by the right has developed that can threaten corporate power, many 
progressive leaders are quite upset. There is a tendency for progressives to auto- 
matically label anyone who has conspiracy views as a right wing fanatic. The error 
of this perspective is exemplified by the research of progressives like Noam 
Chomsky, Michael Parenti, Gore Vidal, and Holly Sklar, who often describe the 



Recent Attacks on the Militias and Patriot Movement 223 



same groups and problems as presented by the Patriot movement. When these 
people criticize the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and Trilateral Commis- 
sion (TC), it is similar to concerns expressed on the right. The one world govern- 
ment that Noam Chomsky described in World Orders Old and New and in other 
writings 25 is similar to the new world order the right attacks. Holly Sklar's book, 
Trilateralism, described the TC and its plans for corporate influence but, perhaps as 
a leftist, she openly criticizes the right and its conspiracy theories." The only 
difference between conspiracy theory and institutional analysis is that the former 
better describes a complex power structure whose machinations defy economic and 
institutional analysis. 

After the Oklahoma bombing, David Helvarg blamed the militias and property 
rights groups for attacking environmentalists. Yet, in War Against the Greens, 
Helvarg identified three prime sources for attacks on environmentalists without 
naming the militias." Alexander Cockburn was right to state that no one has pro- 
vided any evidence that the militias are attacking environmentalists." The call by 
progressives for more government power to suppress the right will only weaken 
the left. Inevitably, enhanced government power will be used to attack the left." 
One progressive correctly said of the right: "These folks are absolutely correct that 
the fear generated by the Oklahoma bombing will be cynically manipulated by a 
state security apparatus desperate to further consolidate and extend its control in the 
name of antiterrorism."" However, hating the right and supporting big govern- 
ment the left, except for Prevailing Winds, has refused to discuss the government 
cover-up and many discrepancies in the Oklahoma bombing reports. Even with 
this atrocity, leaders in the left defend the government, which is one more reason 
why so many progressives have joined the Patriot movement. 

People like Jerry Brown ask where all the progressives have gone. Noam 
Chomsky said people who joined the unions 60 years ago now join paramilitary 
groups. Recently the New York Times published an article about progressives 
forming a militia unit in Maine." To publicize one more militia unit is unusual, 
but there is a potential threat to the corporate elite if the left and right join to- 
gether. Recently, 125 members of this militia, including Earth Firsters and 
Buchanan supporters, lobbied the state legislature to weaken corporate power. This 
is the wave of the future. The progressive establishment should wake up before it 
becomes even more irrelevant. The Patriot movement is a genuine populist 
movement that includes many progressives. The right has grown so powerful in 
recent years, partly because it supports populist issues, the left has abandoned. For 
the left to be revitalized, it must understand that the foremost issue of our time is 
to restore constitutional government. After The Nation and The Progressive 
harshly attacked the militias, they published letters from upset readers correctly 
stating that the militias were not being accurately portrayed and the right was 
attacking the same forces these magazines often criticize." 

On May 10-12, 1996 leading progressives and environmental leaders met in 
Washington, D.C. at a conference presented by the International Forum on 
Globalization. The meeting was called to confront the threat of corporate domi- 
nance over democracy, traditional cultures and nationalities, human welfare, and 
the environment. The goal was to confront the problem of "unelected and un- 
accountable global elites who are seizing control of one-world governance." 
Internationalists and the TC were criticized. The World Trade Organization (WTO) 



224 Treason The New World Order 



was attacked because it was "designed to serve as a global governing body for 
transnational corporate interests." 

Leading environmental groups like the Sierra Club attacked GATT and 
NAFTA. Carl Pope, director of the Sierra Club, said: "The global economy is not 
really inevitable (and) Pat Buchanan deserves a more serious look." Jean-Luc Jou- 
vet of Greenpeace said: "We are staring catastrophe in the face." He acknowledged 
that statements from the World Bank about concern for the environment and the 
world's poor were false. "They were lies. ...There is no way any of us can ignore 
that reality now." Willard Smith of the Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union 
spoke for the AFL-CIO. He said that five years ago, "many of the people here 
were dreamy internationalists of one sort or another. But what we have seen of 
NAFTA, the WTO, and international financial speculation has been a rough wake- 
up call." 

The press refused to discuss this conference because it did not suit the corpo- 
rate model of what we are supposed to think. Most people in the militias and 
Patriot movement would agree with the conclusions reached at this conference 
about stopping the new world order. Except for a brief comment in the San Fran- 
cisco Bay Guardian, the progressive press refused to even discuss this important 
conference. Wall Street has much more control over the progressive press than is 
generally understood. 

The left and right have many similar goals and should work together to restore 
the Constitution and stop the large corporations from establishing the new world 
order dictatorship. Many in the left and right have already been working together to 
stop NAFTA, GATT and the anti-terrorist bill. The Washington Monthly cor- 
rectly said the Patriot movement's constitutional views brought it closer to the 
ACLU and the New Left than to right wing conservatives.'" The New Yorker de- 
scribed the merging of the left and right to fight the governing elite as "fusion 
paranoia." This is called paranoid because people who no longer accept the liberal 
mind-set of massive government control are considered crazy!' 1 

Most progressive critics of the militias and Patriot movement ignore the 
many constitutional issues that are at the heart of the movement; yet this concern 
is the key reason why so many progressives have joined the Patriot movement. 
Chip Berlet blames the rise of the militias and Patriot movement on economic 
problems and "anger over gains by oppressed groups" in the U.S. Scapegoating 
and wild conspiracy theories are to blame!" Marc Cooper in the Nation said: "The 
constitutionalist rhetoric used by the 'patriot' militias merely cloaks the most 
bigoted of views."" These people are more concerned about citizens that criticize 
the government then about government abuses of power because they are blinded 
by their own ideology so they must attack anyone on the right. 

Some voices on the left have acknowledged the constitutional concerns of the 
patriots. Alexander Cockburn attended a gun/militia rally of 2,500 and was pleas- 
antly surprised to discover that the populist issues raised were similar to the 
concerns of the left. Martin Luther King, Jr. was cheered as was the imprisonment 
of a Detroit policemen for killing a black man. When given a copy of a speech 
just presented, Cockburn said: "Most of it could have been delivered by a leftist in 
the late sixties without changing a comma."" Cockburn asked why people who 
object to oppressive governments and economic regulations as in Mexico are 
hailed as heroes by progressives, but when Americans try to defend their rights 



Recent Attacks on the Militias and Patriot Movement 225 



over similar oppressive government policies progressives call these people right 
wing extremists and paranoid racists. 1 ' 

Barbara Dority, in the leftist magazine The Humanist, said after the Oklahoma 
bombing, "This rush to judgment (of the militias) has been accompanied by a 
near-total avoidance of rational analysis, and much of the information attacking the 
militias is being distributed by anti-hate groups with their own agenda." Dority 
discussed the constitutional issues inspiring the Patriot movement and militias and 
agreed with many of these concerns." Reason magazine had an excellent article on 
the militias by a retired U.S. diplomat. The author interviewed many militia 
members over several months and found that "culturally ignorant reporters" were 
telling "sensational stories" rather than looking for the truth. Instead of finding 
racists and anti-Semites, he found that most militia members were employed in 
middle class jobs and had a deep distrust of the government." 

The militias and Patriot movement follow the tradition of populism, not that 
of conservatives. The recent conservative attack on Buchanan, partly because he 
attacked the new world order and corporate dominance, exemplifies how conserva- 
tives and patriots differ." Conservatives support free trade and an international 
outlook, while patriots support American sovereignty and managed trade. Pop- 
ulists attack the asset forfeiture and corporate-welfare laws that conservatives pass. 
Conservatives stress economic issues, while patriots defend constitutional rights. 
Conservatives pass numerous laws such as in welfare and education rarely ac- 
knowledging, as patriots do, that this violates the Constitution. Conservatives 
want more law and order, while patriots what to stop police tyranny. Conserva- 
tives like Newt Gingrich are considered enemies of the people by many patriots 
because he is a CFR member. Progressives attack patriots partly because they do 
not understand that patriots and conservatives are different, because when someone 
is perceived as an enemy, truth doesn't matter. The real fight is not between the 
left and right, it is between liberty and tyranny. Traditional liberals and traditional 
conservatives have sold out to the corporate elite and are destroying the Constitu- 
tion. 

Progressives who attack the right for wanting less government ignore our 
history. A massive federal government is not part of the Constitution. Charles A. 
Reich, in Opposing the System, described how the large corporations are quietly 
gaining total control. He said the constitutional system of checks and balances has 
been superceded by corporate control, yet he supports the New Deal social contract 
of big government helping the people. With the New Deal, liberals abandoned 
constitutional government and installed democratic centralism. Liberals claim that 
we need big government to help the people, yet they also claim to believe in the 
Constitution and the rule of law. This is the great liberal paradox. Most federal 
programs started in the New Deal are unconstitutional. Liberals ignore that the 
Founders did not trust government, so a central government with few powers was 
established with checks and balances installed. Along with restraining the corpora- 
tions, many federal programs should be shifted to the states. Then constitutional 
government could be restored, and there would be less threat of tyranny from a 
smaller federal government. 

Some liberals want to resolve the great liberal paradox by redoing the Consti- 
tution. Lewis Lapham favorably reviewed The Frozen Republic: How the Consti- 
tution is Paralyzing Democracy, which called for a new Constitution. Our present 
predicament exists partly because many have little interest, understanding, or 



226 Treason The New World Order 



respect for the Constitution, which is still the supreme law in America. This is 
partly why the rule of law has been so weakened. Unfortunately, a new Constitu- 
tion today would be totally dominated by the large corporations, and the people's 
rights would be lost. The problem is not the Constitution, it is the misuse of 
power. We don't need big changes in the Constitution, we need to enforce it. 
Thomas Jefferson warned: "In questions of power. ..let no more be heard of 
confidence in men, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the 
Constitution." 

Many Americans believe big government is the main problem, and the media 
supports this myth. In many daily activities, abusive government officials are a 
serious problem; however, the threat of a one world government and the loss of all 
our rights is coming from the large corporations, not from the government. 
Progressives understand that the real problem is the large corporations and their 
dominance of government. Government officials are merely agents of the large 
corporations. While the right often speaks of CFR and TC control, sometimes 
describing the dangerous power of the banks, there is rarely a direct recognition 
that the large corporations are the real problem. Instead the Patriot movement 
primarily attacks problems with the government. This is the biggest weakness in 
the Patriot movement. 

Too often the Patriot movement focuses only on oppressive government ac- 
tions without understanding that the main enemy of the people is the large corpo- 
rations. These are the key leaders of the CFR, TC, and related organizations. In a 
1978-1979 study of CFR members, G. William Domhoff in Who Rules America 
Now?, found that 70 percent of the 100 largest corporations had at least one 
official in the CFR. Twenty-one of the 25 largest banks, 37 percent of the 500 
largest businesses, and 16 of the 25 largest insurance companies had at least one 
official in the CFR. Twenty percent of the CFR members were listed in Poor's 
Register of Corporations, Directors, and Executives. Just as the Patriot movement 
works to restore constitutional government, a second major focus should be to re- 
store corporate charters to the same limited status that existed in the early days of 
our Republic. This will help curtail corporate power. 

Charles A. Reich, in Opposing the System, had one chapter titled "The 
Invisible Government." After this excellent description that anyone in the Patriot 
movement would benefit from studying, this liberal said there is no conspiracy." 
While the left understands better than the right how dangerous the large corpora- 
tions are, only the right carries this threat to its logical and inevitable conclusion. 
If the large corporations aren't stopped, a corporate police state is inevitable. This 
is what the right warns of, but they are called racist and extremists for saying this. 
Why do progressives think corporate leaders are such nice people that they 
wouldn't carry their quest for power to the logical conclusion? One need only study 
how the corporate leaders tried to establish a dictatorship in the 1930s, and what 
these elitists say in hundreds of publications, to understand that a dictatorship is 
coming. The left focuses too much on economic and institutional concepts and 
less on our rights being lost. 

Part of the problem is that people on the right and left have an inbred dislike 
and even hatred of each other, so that even when they support the same positions 
and can benefit by working together this is rarely done. The corporate elite often 
play the left and right against each other, while they sit back and laugh. Divide and 
conquer is an old strategy. People on opposing political spectrums often won't 



Recent Attacks on the Militias and Patriot Movement 227 



even talk to each other. On talk radio, I have never once heard a progressive or 
patriot radio talk show have someone from the opposing political spectrum as a 
guest. People on the left and right are often drawn to attack the other, however 
destructive that may be. This book will probably be attacked by some on each 
political spectrum, because I quote from the left and right. To do this is not 
politically correct. 

Often when people are arrested for a criminal act, professional critics of the 
right immediately claim these people are militia members when there is no proof 
of this. We have entered a period in which the militias will be attacked and blamed 
in numerous incidents, however little evidence there is of militia involvement. 
The Amtrak bombing exemplifies this trend. A message was found which the 
press said made this a terrorist attack tied to the militias. U.S. News & World 
Report, in an editorial, attacked the growing pattern of the press to label criminal 
acts as terrorism that threatens the foundations of America. 40 When the Freemen 
siege developed, the media called them militia extremists. The Freemen don't even 
call themselves a militia, and most militia groups refused to support them. 

On April 19, 1996 CBS, Evening News described a post office assault as a 
militia style robbery. Perhaps soon the press will call George Washington and all 
patriots criminals! Will there next be militia diseases or militia hurricanes? One 
must never underestimate the silliness and intensity with which a government can 
demonize a targeted group. The New York Times, in describing the Russian- 
Chechnya war, noted "States usually mobilize public support for a war by demo- 
nizing their opponents...." The only difference in the U.S. is that the govern- 
ment's assault on the patriots and militias is usually with words, although this 
may change after the election. 

When white soldiers killed a black couple, ABC Evening News on December 
20, 1995 and the Washington Post on December 9, 1995 described the attack as 
racist and right wing extremism and then claimed the Resister was part of this 
problem, but no evidence of this was provided. The article quoted the Resister's 
attack on internationalism and U.S. policy towards Haiti and the UN and said the 
Resister supported "individual rights, strict constitutionalism, limited govern- 
ment...." This is what the Founders said. The New York Times and the New 
Republic have used the same strategy to falsely attack the Resister. The New Re- 
public said there were "white terrorists" and a "sinister club," the Special Forces 
Underground that opposes "liberalism" and "internationalism." 41 Is everyone who 
opposes Wall Street policies a racist and extremist? The Resister does not publish 
racist material, and no one in the press has been able to prove otherwise. But it is 
published by soldiers in the Special Forces Underground, and the ruling elite is 
nervous that such soldiers are critical of their policies. 

As the government has done for decades with targeted groups, it is infiltrating 
agent provocateurs into the militias, trying to cause violence that results in arrests 
and makes it easier for the press to attack the militias as dangerous radicals. The 
April, 1996 FBI alert about possible militia violence was associated with a threat 
issued by an individual from Kansas City, Missouri. This individual was ejected 
from militias in Kansas, Missouri, and South Dakota because of his calls for 
violence. Not only was this individual no longer associated with a militia, but his 
status is highly suspect. 

Recently three people in Oklahoma were convicted of planning to bomb 
several groups, including Morris Dees' center. Ray Lampley, a preacher, suddenly 



228 Treason The New World Order 



called himself a militia leader, although the Oklahoma militia would have nothing 
to do with him. While Lampley and two other people were convicted of the plot, 
two other individuals inspired the plans and testified for the government. One of 
them, Richard Schrum, admitted in the The Daily Oklahoman newspaper that he 
was an FBI informant. Schrum said the FBI hired him after the Oklahoma bomb- 
ing to infiltrate militias in the Southwest and that most militia members are 
patriots who just want to preserve the Constitution." The other person involved in 
instigating the plot, Larry Wayne Crow, was a pilot for Tyson Foods in Arkansas. 
He quit his job, moved in with Lampley, and tried to form a militia and get some 
militia groups to commit violent acts. Crow was initially indicted, but then all 
charges against him were dropped. Morris Dees falsely said the militia was out to 
get him, when, in fact, the Feds initiated this plot which did not even involve the 
militia. 

Another typical case of government entrapment occurred in April, 1996, when 
two members of a Georgia militia were arrested. Initially the press claimed they 
were going to bomb the Atlanta Olympics, but that assertion was withdrawn 
within hours. Then it was reported that there were no bombs, but the defendants 
Robert Starr and William McCranie supposedly had bomb-making materials. At 
the preliminary hearing on May 6, the defense lawyers questioned ATF agent 
Steven Gillis about the case in what is normally a quick and routine proceeding. 
Gillis admitted that government agents placed bomb-making components on 
Starr's property, and he wasn't sure if Starr was even aware the materials were 
there. There was no evidence that the defendants actually possessed or even had any 
knowledge of any bomb-making material. Gillis said they were able to go right to 
the buried material on Starr's 16 acres of land, when they obtained a search war- 
rant, because government agents had originally planted the material. Nancy Lord, 
Starr's defense attorney said: "This is beyond entrapment. It is manufactured evi- 
dence. The materials were put on Mr. Starr's property without his knowledge. The 
whole evidence upon which this case was based was fraudulent.... They have no 
conspiracy, they have no nexus to interstate commerce, they don't even have an 
explosive devise. What they have is an agent provocateur who came into a group, 
trying to cause trouble...." 

Gillis admitted the other defendant, James McCranie, was not at any meetings 
where bomb building was discussed, and when a government agent started talking 
about bomb-making McCranie walked away saying: "I don't want to know any- 
thing about it." Gillis could not identify an agreement between anyone except 
government agents to commit an illegal act, so there was no conspiracy. The only 
people who attended bomb-building classes were government agents and possibly 
one, not two, defendants, and to discuss or write about bomb building is perfectly 
legal. 

Starr, on a short-wave radio show two nights before being arrested, said he 
was going to expose a government set-up against him. The next day, the govern- 
ment obtained arrest warrants. Lord said: "Mr. Starr was arrested not because he 
intended to build those bombs, but because he intended not to. He intended to 
expose the government's confidential informants." Despite government complicity 
in creating this case, the judge forwarded the case to a grand jury which issued 
indictments, and a third militia member was also indicted. The charges include 
conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction and possession of an unregistered 



Recent Attacks on the Militias and Patriot Movement 229 



destructive device, although the government admitted in court that the defendants 
wasn't even aware the material was on their property. 

The Macon Telegraph and Atlanta Journal Constitution wrote several articles 
critical of the government's conduct in this case. Bail has been rejected for the de- 
fendants although they are respected members of the community with no criminal 
record. This case shows how the government harasses targeted groups. In the 
initial arrest there is much media attention, and later when charges are dropped, as 
in the Earth First case I discuss in Chapter XII, the press ignores that. The result 
is that people think the targeted movement is dangerous." 

The arrest of the Viper group in Phoenix, Arizona on July 2, 1996 may be 
another example of an overreaching government. CBS Evening News on July 2, 
1996, quoting federal investigators, said an attack on government buildings wasn't 
imminent. Earlier that day when Bryant Gumble on NBC had asked the U.S. 
prosecutor in Phoenix if there was evidence that the Viper group actually planned 
to carry out attacks or if they were just preparing for a possible future, she refused 
to respond. However, as when the Georgia militia members were arrested, the 
government and most of the press said this was a dangerous group planning an 
imminent attack. Immediately after the arrests Clinton said danger was narrowly 
avoided, and Ray Kelly, under Secretary of the Treasury, falsely said they would be 
indicted to blow up federal buildings. The defendants were not charged with 
planning to bomb any buildings nor to overthrow the government. 

Publically it was claimed that the videos show a conspiracy to bomb build- 
ings but that wasn't shown in the charges. The charges did not even say what 
would be done with the explosives. In addition, why did the government rush to 
destroy the explosives, supposedly taken as evidence? Why was there a rush to 
destroy this evidence? As in the Georgia case, was this evidence planted by the 
government? Reportedly the gernades were inert and the rockets were toy weapons. 
The government case was so weak that at the preliminary hearing the judge agreed 
to free six of the 12 defendants until the trial despite the governments claim that 
these were dangerous terrorists. 

On July 9, ABCs Nightline, usually a harsh critic of the right, admitted that 
the government made many strong charges against this group, the press fully sup- 
ported this, and then the charges filed in court weren't nearly as serious as what the 
government initially told the press about this group. An ATF agent testified at the 
preliminary hearing that the government was absolutely certain there was no plan 
to bomb any building. The agent even said they didn't warn anyone of a possible 
threat because there was no immediate danger from this group. 

As in the Georgia case, it is too early yet to tell if the Feds also planted 
evidence such as weapons in the Viper case. Several months ago the Viper group 
was approached by two government agent provocateurs to identify certain build- 
ings to attacked in the future. This group refused to support this. Why are the Feds 
encouraging people to attack government buildings? At least one Fed tried to get 
this group to pass out Aryan Nation literature, but they refused. 

In the 1970s, when agent provocateurs infiltrated the left there was an uproar 
in the national media and supposedly the Federal police stopped such illegal acts. 
Today, as the secret government lightens its control over all levels of society, 
there is a loud silence from the press and Congress about this infiltration program. 
Although an ATF agent testified in the Georgia case that the government 
manufactured the evidence and there was no proof linking the two defendants to the 



230 Treason The New World Order 



bomb-making material, the press refused to discuss this. Members of the national 
press attended the preliminary hearing, but the results were not reported. 
Newsweek May 6, 1996, just before the hearing, falsely claimed that pipe bombs 
existed and the Olympics were targeted. A free press is essential to have a free 
society, but it must be a press that has some connection with the truth. Our press 
is used as a propaganda tool by the corporate elite and government. 

Rarely does the national media intelligently discuss the issues that concern 
millions of people in the militias and Patriot movement. Few in the national 
media ask if there is any truth to what is believed by these people. Few want to 
look at the deeper causes of the developing militia movement. Few want to 
acknowledge that the militias have historically played an important part of our 
heritage. Instead, certain patriot positions were stated, such as concerns about the 
UN, without analysis except for the comment that these views were paranoid and 
extremist. People representing the militias and Patriot movement are rarely al- 
lowed to speak in the national media. Only the corporate approved version of 
events is allowed to be heard. 

Instead of intelligently discussing the many issues relevant to the patriot 
community, the press continues to demonize the right. To the corporate-national 
media what they decide is politically correct can be discussed. When other views 
on the right or left are introduced, it doesn't matter how many tens of millions of 
people hold such views; they are deemed to be dangerous, extremists, and racists. 
Attack the messenger to avoid discussing the message. The more powerful a 
movement becomes, the more nervous the government becomes, and the more 
intense is the attack. Governments always act this way. The Democrats call Re- 
publican attempts to weaken government power extremism, while the right calls 
environmentalists extremist crazies. Those who supported democracy in Nazi 
Germany were called extremists. Over 200 years ago, people like George Wash- 
ington and Thomas Jefferson were called patriots, but to the British they were 
dangerous radicals. Vietnam War protesters were called communist inspired, Gold- 
water might have used the nuclear bomb, Gore Vidal was an anti-Semite, Perot 
was paranoid, and Buchanan is a neo-Nazi. The real sin of these people is that they 
threatened establishment control. Why have many liberals forgotten this lesson? 

That genuine political dissent is so demonized increasingly alienates millions 
of people from the political system. Tens of millions of people are so disgusted 
with politics that they won't vote. There have been times in our past when people 
would have said we should explore why many people are so angry, perhaps 
correcting excesses. We saw this during the soul searching of the civil rights 
movement, but now the response of the Washington crowd is to call protesters 
racists and paranoid, passing more laws to take away more rights. Criticism of the 
government is called criticism of the nation. Political extremism is a label often 
applied to attack beliefs that those in power don't like. Openly and fully debating 
issues, including problems that have been ignored, and advocating unpopular 
positions gives our society the variety and vitality needed to function as a free 
society. Justice Brandeis said: "Repression breeds hate; hate menaces stable 
government; the path of safety lies in the opportunity to discuss freely supposed 
grievances and proposed remedies." The main unifying wish of those in the Patriot 
movement and the militias is to see the Constitution restored and to return to the 
teachings of people like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. To the ruling 
elite these are very dangerous concepts. 



231 



Chapter XVIII 
Murder As A Political Act 



"Make yourself sheep and the wolves will eat you." 

Benjamin Franklin 

The Kennedy assassination was "an act of overthrowing the government, 
whole new form of government is going to take over the country." 

Jack Ruby 



Murder or assassination for political gain is one more way the secret govern- 
ment maintains control. Many others besides the Kennedys and Martin Luther 
King have been assassinated. A favorite way to kill people is a bullet to the head 
and then have it called a suicide. This is an especially suspicious form of death 
when the local authorities then act in an unprofessional manner. Arranging an 
accident, often with a plane or car, is another method used to kill people. With so 
many suspicious suicides especially around Clinton, perhaps there is a new disease 
that doctors haven't yet isolated. Sufficiently irritate the secret government and you 
may find yourself dead, with it promptly called an accident or suicide. 

I will only briefly discuss the deaths of the Kennedys and Martin Luther King, 
because that material has been reviewed by so many. Killing prominent political 
leaders made it easier to control and direct people towards tighter gun control and 
surveillance supposedly to prevent crime and terrorism. An excellent summary of 
the many people who died mysteriously after President Kennedy's death is provided 
in High Treason, by Groden and Livingstone. One person in the London Sunday 
Times said the odds were 100,000 trillion to one that so many witnesses would die 
so soon after the assassination. At least 21 witnesses died soon after President 
Kennedy's death, some violently or under mysteries circumstances. The authorities 
said some of these people killed themselves while others, such as Richard R. Carr, 
were threatened and attacked for years. Carr fought off two murder attempts. 

Shortly before Robert Kennedy was killed, several people saw Sirhan, his 
convicted murderer, with a woman who wore a polka-dot dress. Such a person ran 
from the shooting, telling an elderly couple that they had just shot Kennedy. Was 
this woman Sirhan's controller? In 1993 National Public Radio aired a docum- 
entary entitled The RFK Tapes, suggesting that Sirhan Sirhan was brainwashed 
and set up so that the real killer(s) of Robert Kennedy could escape. There was 
reference to Dr. William Bryan, Jr., a California sex therapist, now deceased, who 
supposedly conducted hypnosis for the CIA. Several years ago A&E aired a docu- 
mentary in which this same therapist bragged to two witnesses that he was part of 
the team that programed Sirhan, preparing him for the Kennedy hit. 

Many have presented evidence that the L.A. Police Department (LAPD) was 
heavily infiltrated by the CIA. The LAPD obviously harassed witnesses to change 



232 Treason The New World Order 



their story to fit the official version, and the murder investigation was botched. It 
also destroyed the trial evidence, and the coroner's autopsy said Kennedy was shot 
from no more than three inches behind his head. However, many said Sirhan was 
at least three feet in front of Kennedy. Retired LAPD sergeant Paul Schraga, the 
first cop to arrive at the shooting, believes a conspiracy occurred and that right- 
wing zealots in this department's elite intelligence unit were involved in the ass- 
assination. 1 

In September, 1989 the BBC presented a documentary, Who Killed Martin 
Luther King, with evidence of government involvement in the murder. The House 
Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in 1979 concluded that there was 
probably a conspiracy to kill Dr. King. A government agent testified before the 
HSCA that "We were operating an intensive vendetta against Dr. King in an effort 
to destroy him." Harold Weisberg, through documents obtained from the Freedom 
of Information Act (FOIA), found many irregularities in the FBI's investigation of 
King's death. Information released showed that the CIA had been very interested in 
Dr. King since the 1960s. Shortly after King's death, his mother was shot dead. 
She attended the autopsy and could have testified about discrepancies in the official 
version of events. 

Charles Stephens lived in the boarding house from which James Earl Ray 
supposedly shot King. He testified that he saw Ray running down the hall just 
after hearing a rifle shot. His wife said he was drunk and outside when he claimed 
to have seen Ray. She also said Ray was not in the boarding house that day. When 
she refused to testify as the authorities wanted, she was threatened and told to shut 
up. Then she was put into a mental institution for 10 years, although she had no 
history of mental illness. Recently Jules Ron Kimble, a convicted murderer, ad- 
mitted being very involved in King's death, and that the conspiracy involved the 
FBI, CIA, and the mob. Kimble confirmed that Ray was involved in the plot, but 
said he was set up to take the fall for the killing. Kimble has a long record of mob 
involvement and CIA and FBI contacts. 

According to the HSCA report Myron Billett, the trusted chauffeur of mafia 
boss Sam Giancana, drove him and Gambino to a meeting in upstate New York in 
1968 to meet people identified as representatives of the FBI and CIA. They offered 
$1 million to have King killed. Billett said Sam Giancana replied: "Hell no, not 
after you screwed up the Kennedy deal like that." Two weeks after Billett gave this 
information in an interview, he died of emphysema, as expected. 

After John McFerren, a black grocery store owner, told what he knew about 
the King death he was beaten, robbed, and shot at. Bill Sartor, an investigative re- 
porter, working on a book about the mob and King's death infiltrated the mob in 
Memphis and New Orleans. He died mysteriously in Texas while finishing the 
book. The cause of death could not be confirmed after two autopsies.' 

In the last years of his life, Malcolm X often attacked the government, espe- 
cially U.S. foreign policy, and he was under constant government surveillance. 
Two weeks before his murder, he was barred from reentering France. After his 
death a prominent North African diplomat told an American reporter that French 
intelligence was informed by the CIA that they were going to kill Malcolm X, and 
France didn't want it to happen on their soil. After his death the local police said 
protection had been offered but that Malcolm X had rejected it. Alex Haley ques- 
tioned this and reported that Malcolm X repeatedly asked for police protection. 



Murder As A Political Act 233 



Shortly after Malcolm X was murdered in 1965, Leon Ameer, the New Eng- 
land representative for the group Malcolm X headed, announced that he had proof 
of who really killed Malcolm X, saying they were from Washington. The next day 
he was found dead. The police said he died of an epileptic fit, but his wife said a 
complete medical checkup a month before had produced no evidence of epilepsy. 
Perhaps it was political epilepsy! In 1979 one of the three men convicted in the 
death of Malcolm X admitted that someone involved in the assassination was an 
FBI agent in the Nation of Islam. 

A fifth prominent political leader who died during this period was Walter 
Reuther, head of the United Auto Workers (UAW). He died May 9, 1970 when his 
chartered plane crashed because of a faulty altimeter. One and a half years earlier he 
had almost died in an identical accident. The National Transportation Safety Board 
found seven abnormalities in the altimeter, strongly suggesting there was sabo- 
tage, yet the final report ignored this evidence. There were no other defects in the 
plane nor was there evidence of pilot error. These small planes are constantly in- 
spected so it is unbelievable that seven defects would not have been detected. The 
family believes Reuther was murdered. Over the years there were various attempts 
to kill the Reuther brothers, and the police barely investigated these assaults. 
Ralph Winstead spent eight years working for the UAW investigating these assas- 
sination attempts and died in what was called an accident in 1957. For years 
Reuther effectively promoted progressive causes as a powerful labor leader. A 
strong critic of the Vietnam War, he was at the top of Nixon's enemy list. Three 
months before Reuther died Egil Krogh, a Nixon aide later arrested as a Watergate 
burglar, obtained the FBI file on Reuther. When interviewed about this in 1985, 
Krogh said he didn't remember this. To this day the government won't release 
many documents on Reuther and those released are mostly inked out. What is there 
to hide? 

In 1955 the House Committee on Un-American Activities subpoenaed many 
actors and musicians, looking for a communist conspiracy in the entertainment 
industry. Much of the wrath of the McCarthy era was directed against people in 
Hollywood. People in the entertainment industry have a unique capacity and op- 
portunity to stir the people, so it is always important for a police state to control 
and direct artists. 

Over the years some have speculated about the suspicious deaths of Janis 
Joplin, Jimmy Hendrix, and Jim Morrison. This occurred when the government 
was very concerned about Vietnam War protests and the power of musicians to 
awaken the people. A few years ago there was a low-budget film, Beyond the 
Doors, with the theme that these people were deliberately killed by a special gov- 
ernment commando unit because they were considered a threat to the government. 
This film was discussed on the television show, A Current Affair, December 1, 
1989. Morrison was allegedly found dead on July 5, 1970 by his girlfriend Pamela 
Courson while visiting Paris. He was buried two days later, with the cause of 
death listed as a heart attack although he was only 27. No friends except Courson 
ever saw the body. There was no police report, no doctor present, and no autopsy. 
When Courson filed a death certificate on July 7, she said there were no living 
relatives; yet Morrison's family lived in Virginia.* 

John Lennon was killed because he supported the peace movement and was 
again getting active politically. Mac Brussell, an expert on the illegal activities of 
the secret government, reported years ago that the government killed Lennon and 



234 Treason The New World Order 



other rock musicians. Various musicians who died under suspicious circumstances 
include Tim Buckley, Jim Croce, Mama Cass Elliot, Duane Allman, Phil Oakes, 
Brian Epstein manager of the Beetles, Michel Jeffery manager for Jimi Hendrix, 
and Donald Jackson manager for the Grateful Dead. The full list is quite long. 

William Sullivan was third-in-command of the FBI in charge of the domestic 
intelligence division until Hoover fired him in 1971. Sullivan became a strong 
critic of the FBI and was testifying against various FBI agents involved in illegal 
domestic surveillance activities. He was also writing a book, The Bureau, about 
the FBI. On November 9, 1977 the 18-year-old son of a state policeman killed 
Sullivan, just when he was to speak before the HSCA. Sullivan was supposedly 
mistaken for a deer even though the rifle had a telescopic sight. The killer received 
a $500 fine and his hunting license was suspended for 10 years. In 1977 six top 
officials of the FBI died within six months.' In 1978 Regis Kennedy, an FBI agent 
who may have been involved in both Kennedy's deaths, testified before the HSCA. 
He died soon after. 

In the early 1980s Rudy Lozano was a union organizer who effectively united 
blacks, Latinos, and whites to support progressive issues. One day a biker stopped 
by his home and asked for a drink of water. Lozano was shot in front of his chil- 
dren and nothing was stolen. Paramedics thought they might be able to save him 
but the police blocked their aid because "evidence might be destroyed" and he died. 
There had been various death threats. 

Steven Carr, one more player in the contra arms and drug smuggling 
operation, was going to testify before Congress. He had seen the arms shipments 
and cocaine smuggling and had been involved in a plot to attack the American 
embassy in Costa Rica. After a short sentence in a Florida jail for his involvement 
in these activities, he fled to California because he feared being murdered. He was 
killed on December, 1986 in Van Nuys, California. According to leaked police re- 
ports Carr supposedly said that he swallowed three bags of cocaine. Three autop- 
sies disagreed on key points; however, they agreed there was no sign he had 
swallowed three bags of cocaine. There were numerous other conflicting facts 
about the body. Despite the numerous discrepancies, the case was officially closed 
in April, 1987. A reporter was told by Peter Glibbery, an American then jailed in 
Costa Rica, that a CIA operative warned him the CIA killed Carr and he had better 
shut up. 

Like Karen Silkwood, Dorothy Legarreta died in a mysterious car accident in 
1988. Her briefcase, which contained previously secret government documents ob- 
tained in a class action lawsuit, was missing. According to the tow-truck driver it 
was discarded because it was damaged, but this violated the law. Legarreta was 
writing a book about secret radiation experiments on people. In 1982 she had 
found the notorious letter from Joseph Hamilton comparing human radiation ex- 
periments in the U.S. to the Buchenwald death camp experiments.' 

In 1989 Wilford Draper signed an affidavit that he had been coerced and terri- 
fied by FBI agents and prosecutors to provide false evidence against Leonard 
Peltier, the prominent Indian political prisoner. In October, 1990 he was murdered 
by unknown assailants. 

On August 10, 1991 the body of Joseph Daniel Casolaro was found in 
Martinsburg, W.V. with his wrists slashed. Casolaro met someone concerning his 
investigation of a major government conspiracy he called the Octopus, a network 
of people associated with the U.S. Justice Department's improper use of Inslaw 



Murder As A Political Act 235 



software, Iran-contra, BCCI, gun smuggling, and drug trafficking. Two months 
before his death, Casolaro told his brother if he died in an accident, "don't believe 
it." He had received numerous death threats. 

As often happens in these cases, the police labeled the death a suicide, and the 
family strongly disagreed. On August 11, 1992 the House Judiciary Committee 
criticized the suicide ruling and listed many irregularities. Casolaro's body was 
embalmed before his family was notified which also made an autopsy less effec- 
tive. Under West Virginia law next of kin have to be notified before a body can be 
embalmed. Evidence left in the room made it easy to reach Casolaro's relatives, 
but they weren't contacted for two days. The room in which he died was not sealed 
by the police, so a cleaning woman sanitized it; his notes, including a draft of his 
book on the Octopus, were never found; and a person Casolaro was seen speaking 
to was never identified. Many feel he was killed because of what he discovered and 
the book he was writing. When you study the secret government and its activities, 
it can be fatal. 

On January 31, 1991 Alan D. Standorf was murdered. He worked for the Na- 
tional Security Agency and had provided information to Casolaro. Jack Anderson 
feels that the death's of two other reporters may be connected to their investigation 
of the same Octopus organization. British researcher Jonathan Moyle was found 
March, 1990 hanged in the closet of his hotel room in Santiago, Chile. He was 
investigating Chilean arms dealer Carlos Cardoen, a prominent figure in the In- 
slaw case. On July 29, 1991 Larence Ng, a reporter for the London Financial 
Times, was found shot dead in Guatemala City. He was investigating a BCCI 
connection to arms sales in Guatemala. 

The Chicago investigator, Sherman Skolnick, said in recent years 41 federal 
grand jury witnesses in the Inslaw case have been murdered. A Media Bypass 
article identified up to 40 people murdered so that the Justice Department would 
keep control of the Inslaw PROMIS software.' This included Gail Spiro and her 
three children who were shot in the head on November 1, 1992 in California. The 
death squads that work for the secret government also kill children. Three days later 
her husband Ian Spiro, was found with a bullet in the head, and the police 
promptly said he killed himself and his family. A week later the family gardener 
was also found with a bullet in the head. Perhaps the police will claim that Spiro 
came back from the dead to kill his gardener. Spiro, associated with the CIA, was 
collecting documents for a grand jury investigating the Inslaw case. The Inslaw 
software, taken over by the U.S. Justice Department after it forced Inslaw into 
bankruptcy, has been sold to many foreign intelligence agencies and banks with a 
back door. This provides ready access to extensive information, and this software 
makes it easy to track people, which is why so many people have been killed. On 
February 14, 1994 lawyers for Inslaw said the Justice Department has its own 
secret intelligence agency. 

Numerous people associated with President Clinton have died in recent years. 
Clinton was placed in power by the secret government which controls both politi- 
cal parties, and they are merely protecting their investment in him. Many of these 
deaths have been discussed by Nicholas A. Guarino in Murder, Bank Fraud, Drugs, 
and Sex, The Clinton Chronicles Book edited by Patrick Matrisciana, and an 
article by Troy Underhill in Media Bypass February, 1995. 

The death of White House deputy counsel Vince Foster July 20, 1993 aroused 
considerable controversy. In 1994 the Fiske report said this was a suicide. How- 



236 Treason The New World Order 



ever, the The New York Post in early 1994 did a series of articles showing many 
strange events surrounding this death and the resulting investigation. In the spring 
of 1994 various television stations including WGN in Chicago presented informa- 
tion that Foster was murdered. The park police, not the FBI, investigated Foster's 
death. One day before Foster died the head of the FBI William Sessions was 
abruptly fired and given a few hours to clear his desk. Previously Sessions told 
Clinton he would resign when a replacement was found. Sessions said the White 
House interfered in the investigation of Foster's death. Various sources state that 
Sessions established an elite unit in the FBI to investigate Bush and Clinton cor- 
ruption. This is why he was fired and his reputation attacked. While various 
newspapers said Foster was depressed, none explained what these burdens were that 
drove him to suicide. According to the investigating authorities, White House 
counsel Bernard Nussbaum kept them from examining documents concerning 
Foster's death, and Foster's personal diary and personal papers were removed." 

Standard investigation procedures were not followed in Foster's death. In the 
summer of 1994 a reporter for The London Daily Telegraph discovered that no 
authorities had spoken to people in the homes abutting Ft. Mercy Park where 
Foster's body was found. Key witnesses gave contradictory statements, and it is 
not even certain that Foster died in Ft. Mercy Park. Little blood was found, the 
body was laid out as if in a coffin, and they couldn't even find the bullet or bone 
fragments from the exit wound in Foster's skull. Was this a miraculous bullet as 
in President Kennedy's assassination? And in 1995 Miquel Rodriquez and Bill 
Duffy, chief investigators to special Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr, resigned 
because they were not allowed to conduct a proper investigation of Foster's death. 
There was almost no publicity about these resignations. Experienced investigators 
using laboratory tests have concluded that Foster did not kill himself, and he did 
not die in Fort Marcy Park. 

Patrick Knowlton saw people with Foster in the park, but his statements were 
changed by the FBI. After an October 22, 1995 article about this in the London 
Sunday Telegraph, Knowlton was subpoenaed to testify before Starr's grand jury 
hearing. In the days before his testimony, he was tailed by numerous people and at 
least one car belonged to the federal government. In 1996 the National Security 
Agency revealed, in response to a FOIA request, by the Washington Weekly that it 
had 700 documents about Foster but they couldn't be released for national security 
reasons. Some claim Foster was killed partly because he was involved in 
espionage. 

Perhaps the most accurate comment on the death of Foster came from Webster 
Hubbel. Now in prison, this criminal controlled the U.S. Justice Department for 
Clinton as Associate Attorney General. He told a partner of the Rose law firm: 
"Don't believe a word you hear. It was not suicide. It couldn't have been." 9 On 
October 25, 1995 three world renown handwriting experts announced that the 
Foster suicide note was a forgery. There is a tremendous amount of information 
available showing suspicious circumstances with Foster's death. Interested parties 
should contact the Western Journalism Center (1-800-952-5595). 

On July 30, 1992 C. Victor Raider II and his son died in a plane crash near 
Anchorage, Alaska in good weather. Raiser had been finance co-chairman for 
Clinton's presidential campaign, but he became disillusioned and left. That made 
him a potential threat. On June 22, 1993 the partially decomposed body of Paul 
Wilcher, a Washington lawyer investigating government corruption, was found. 



Murder As A Political Act 237 



The cause of death was not determined. He was investigating drug and gun running 
from Mena, Arkansas, the Waco massacre, and the October surprise conspiracy in 
the 1980 election. Three weeks before his death, he sent Janet Reno a 99 page 
affidavit of his findings. Jon Walker fell, or was pushed to his death on August 
15, 1993 from the top of a building in Arlington, Virginia. He was an investiga- 
tor for the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC). In March, 1992 he contacted the 
Kansas City RTC office staling that he had information regarding the Clintons, 
Whitewater Development, and the Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan. 

Jerry Parks headed the firm in charge of Clinton's security in Arkansas during 
the 1992 race. He was murdered September 26, 1993 in Little Rock in a profes- 
sional hit. According to Park's son, his father investigated Clinton in the 1980s 
and the material gathered, which allegedly included pictures of Clinton with 
various women, was stolen from the family home in July 1993. The family said 
Parks was being followed before he was murdered. According to Park's wife, he 
was owed $80,000 for the security provided for Clinton's campaign. When pay- 
ment was delayed, Park threatened to take his evidence to the press. Parks was paid 
$80,000 in July, 1994. Much of this story received prominent coverage in the 
London Sunday Telegraph but not in the U.S. Parks' son told the Sunday 
Telegraph, "I believe they had my father killed to save Bill Clinton's career." In 
the fall of 1994 two members of the Arkansas State Police Criminal Investigation 
Division told their superiors they had sufficient evidence to indict a former 
employee of a senior member of the Clinton While House for Parks murder. Their 
request for the indictment was denied. 

Ed Willey had managed Clinton's presidential campaign finance committee 
and was reportedly involved in money laundering. On November 30, 1993 he was 
found hanged. On March 3, 1994 Ronald Rogers, a dentist from Arkansas was 
killed when his plane exploded in the air. Rogers reportedly had sensitive informa- 
tion involving Whitewater. The next day he was supposed to meet Ambrose 
Pritchard, a reporter for the London Daily Telegraph based in Washington, D.C. 

Kathy Ferguson, died May 11, 1994 from a bullet in her right temple in 
Sherwood, Arkansas. A note was found by her body, and police called it a suicide. 
None of her friends believed she killed herself. Five days before, her ex-husband 
Danny Ferguson, an Arkansas state trooper was named as a codefendant in the 
sexual harassment suit involving Clinton. She told co-workers Clinton was mad 
at her ex-husband for bringing him a woman (perhaps Paula Jones) who refused 
his sexual advances. Women rarely use a gun to kill themselves, and Ferguson 
worked at a hospital so she could have easily obtained pills. Bill Shelton, 
Ferguson's boyfriend was found shot in the head on her grave June 12, 1994. A 
note was again found, and the police promptly called it a suicide. Then there is the 
June 23, 1993 death of Stanley Huggins, reportedly from viral pneumonia. In 
1987 Huggins led an investigation of the Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan, 
which is part of the Whitewater probe."' 

Many people are scared by the invisible government, so they lie or remain 
silent. William Cooper a retired Naval Intelligence officer and author of Behold A 
Pale Horse left the service partly because he was disgusted with many of the secret 
documents concerning illegal activities, such as the murder of President Kennedy, 
that he had seen. After his discharge he tried to provide information to a reporter. 
In his book Cooper describes two attempts on his life. After the second attempt, 
while recovering in a hospital, two men visited him and said that if he didn't shut 



238 Treason The New World Order 



up the third attempt would be successful. He then shut up for 16 years. 11 Sally 
Perdue, a former Miss Arkansas, told Evans-Pritchard that she had an affair with 
Clinton. She was threatened with violence if she repeated her accusations and a 
shotgun shell was found on the seat of her jeep. 

In 1992 former LAPD detective Mike Rothmiller wrote LA. Secret Police, 
which described the secret surveillance activities of the LAPD. He was almost 
killed after he started investigating certain alleged drug smugglers working for the 
CIA. After being shot, Rothmiller was disabled, but the police department denied 
him a pension or any benefits. Rothmiller had one suspect trailed by the IRS. The 
suspect went from LA. directly to the White House. 

At times family members or close friends are threatened or killed if a person 
doesn't shut up. Basil Abbott started flying illegal drugs into the U.S. for the 
DEA in 1973. He was jailed and then, after being released, tried to get the press to 
investigate this corruption. While he was in prison his wife, fleeing back to her 
native Sweden in fear of her life, was killed in Berlin. The reach of the secret gov- 
ernment is world wide. 12 

Abbott's friend, CIA agent Robert Corson, prepared to go public about CIA 
drug operations. He was found dead in an El Paso motel. Terry Reed was forced to 
take his wife and young children into hiding because they were all threatened. 
Lester K. Coleman, a former Defense Intelligence Agency agent, revealed too 
much publicly about the Lockerbie plane crash, so he had to flee the country be- 
cause of threats to kill him and his family, including three young children. 

On June 23, 1993, and again on November 3, 1994, CBS's Eye to Eye pre- 
sented a story about the death in 1991 of Colonel James Sabow third in command 
at the Marine Corps Air Station in EI Toro, California and a decorated Vietnam 
War hero. Sabow was charged with improperly using a plane, and he wanted a 
court martial to present charges that the base was being used to smuggle guns to 
South America with illegal drugs brought back on the return flights. One morning 
he was found dead at his home from a shotgun blast. The authorities promptly 
called it a suicide, but his family and friends called it murder. A private investiga- 
tor found that there were no fingerprints on the shotgun found by his body, which 
was not possible unless Sabow wore gloves, which was not the case. Someone 
else pulled the trigger. Relatives filed a suit against the Navy and Marine Corps 
claiming a conspiracy to cover-up his murder. The family hired forensic experts 
who labeled the death a murder with the body moved to look like a suicide. When 
Newsweek ran a full page article on Sabow's death and other suspicious deaths in 
the military, they did not print the statement by Sabow about the air base being 
used to import illegal drugs." 

In December, 1993 the Philadelphia Inquirer did a four part scries about 
suspicious deaths in the military that were called suicides. There were 3,375 cases 
of suicide in the military from 1979 to 1993, with relatives in at least 60 cases 
challenging the results. In one "suicide" a soldier was found shot in the head with 
his hat stuffed in his mouth, handcuffs attached to his wrist, and radio cable around 
his neck. In 10 of 40 cases investigated, family members said the deceased person 
had told them about drug or weapons smuggling. Chad Langford's death was called 
a suicide. Ten days earlier he had told his father his life had been threatened during 
an undercover drug investigation. The Army said Chad arranged his own death so it 
would look like murder. The report could not confirm that Chad's fingerprints were 



Murder As A Political Act 239 



on the gun or even if he had fired the gun, and other fingerprints were found on his 
personal items." 

I am not suggesting that every falsely claimed suicide in the military was a 
cover-up for illegal activities such as drug smuggling, but the murder of James 
Sabow is not the only instance of a decent American losing his life when he tried 
to stop criminal government activities. What happened to Colonel Sabow will 
happen to many honest officers, if the secret government succeeds in its plan to 
establish a police state. 

Sometimes people who write controversial books die before the book is re- 
leased. In early August, 1993 Ron Rummell, also known as Creston, was found 
dead in a Portland, Oregon park. He had been shot through the mouth and was 
supposedly holding a gun in his hands. The police called it a suicide and cremated 
the body the next day, without an autopsy and without notifying relatives. He 
published Alien Digest and was close friends with people who publish Revelations 
of Awareness. Both publications release radical information on the secret govern- 
ment and the UFO phenomena. On June 2, 1995 Fox TV discussed this death 
because he was writing a book on the supposed suicide and accidental death of over 
30 British scientists working on top secret projects in the British defense industry. 
These projects included mind control, star wars, and planting devices in the brain 
without the recipient being aware of this. In some of these "suicides" the victims 
were found with their hands and feet bound. While the U.S. press has otherwise 
refused to cover this story, the British press has had broad coverage with members 
of parliament calling for an investigation. Reporters like Tony Collins call it a 
conspiracy, especially since the authorities have shown no concern. A similar case 
involved William LeMaster, president of the failed Indian Springs State Bank, a 
CIA and mob front. Hours after his body was found he was cremated, and there 
was no autopsy. 

The case of Frank Olson was reviewed on NBCs' Unsolved Mysteries 
September 25, 1994. In 1953 Olson was a germ warfare expert working at Fort 
Detrick, with the CIA also involved in this research. Congressional hearings in 
1975 revealed that Olson was given LSD without his knowledge as part of the 
CIA's secret MK ULTRA program involving mind control. Olson promptly be- 
came very disorientated and depressed and told his wife he wanted to quit his job. 
He became a security risk to the CIA. 

Within days he was taken to New York City to see a psychiatrist and was 
pushed or fell from the thirteenth story of a Manhattan hotel. It is strange that a 
top government scientist who was considered to be suicidal should stay on the 
thirteenth floor of a hotel. His roommate Robert Lashbrook, a CIA scientist, was 
very uncooperative with the police. Just after the fall he called a number and, ac- 
cording to the hotel night manager, said: "Well, he's gone." The other party re- 
sponded, "That's too bad." Lashbrook did not call the police or an ambulance. A 
superficial examination of Olson was done and his death was labeled a suicide. The 
autopsy said there were multiple lacerations on the face and scalp, but in July, 
1994 another autopsy could not find these lacerations which you would expect if 
Olson had fallen through a window as claimed. Instead, the extensive injuries on 
the face and body suggested that Olson had been beaten before his death. On 
November, 28, 1994 it was announced that the autopsy strongly suggested Olson 
was murdered. There is now an attempt to get Congress to reopen the investiga- 
tion. 



240 Treason The New World Order 



Don Smith was gunned down by two passing cars at 2 a.m. on July 15, 1995 
while walking his dog. He had been expecting trouble and was able to return 16 
shots. Minutes after a doctor at the hospital announced that he was well on the 
way to recovery, he died. Smith was a militia member, editor of a newsletter Writ 
Rap, and expert in the law, who made many enemies handling 80 to 100 cases at a 
time. Most of his suits were directed against government agencies. 

The government has the ability to kill people by using drugs to cause cancer, 
heart attacks, or strokes that make it appear natural." Documents released by the 
FOIA show that, by 1954, the CIA had perfected the means to give people can- 
cer." An article in the April 2, 1979 Miami Herald discussed the CIA's use of 
diseases to kill people. The CIA probably experimented on terminally ill cancer 
patients under the guise of legitimate medical research to perfect this technology, 
although healthy victims were probably also used. Anatoliy Golitsyn, an ex-senior 
KGB agent, said the communists also developed poisons that could be applied by 
direct physical contact and would leave no trace, so death would be attributed to 
natural causes." Many intelligence agencies use these chemicals. 

In 1978 a German court convicted a person for murdering his wife by placing 
in her food a chemical that gave her cancer. Experts at the trial testified that the 
chemical left no trace in the victim's body after a few hours. This poison was 
fairly well known, so the judge would not allow it to be identified." The New 
York Daily News on October 6, 1979 reported that a biologist Steven Harper poi- 
soned a family of five with a cancer causing agent. 

Hoover died suddenly during apolitical struggle with Nixon and the CIA, just 
two weeks before the shooting of George Wallace. That shooting probably ensured 
that Nixon would be reelected. A report in the Harvard Crimson said the Senate 
Ervin Committee received evidence that break-ins of Hoover's apartment were led 
by Gordon Liddy and certain Cubans also allied with the CIA. A poison of the 
thyon-phosphate genre that induces fatal heart attacks was reportedly placed about 
Hoover's personal toilet articles. A spokesman for the Senate Intelligence Com- 
mittee said they had evidence that E. Howard Hunt, a former CIA agent, had 
planned to kill Jack Anderson with an untraceable poison obtained from a former 
CIA doctor." 

Mae Brussel died of cancer under mysterious circumstances. An aggressive 
reporter, she quit her radio show because of death threats. The Indian teacher 
Bhagwan Rajneesh was arrested by federal authorities on October 28, 1985. Soon 
after he was constantly ill and suffered premature aging. Tests in London showed 
possible poisoning with a heavy metal probably thallium. 

David Yallop in In God's Name presented evidence that Pope John Paul I was 
murdered because he wanted to return the church to its humble beginnings and 
break the power of the Vatican bank, which has long been allied to the mafia. The 
pope died of a heart attack but no autopsy was performed. The Vatican falsely 
claimed that church law prevented conducting an autopsy, as many wanted. There 
are many other strange events surrounding this death. 

James A. Weyer had beaten the IRS in several major cases, including the Phil 
Marsh case in San Francisco, by quoting IRS regulations. Four days after he 
returned home from the Marsh case, he died from a heart attack. He was 53 and in 
excellent health. 

Numerous people associated with Iran-contra met an early death. Navy Lt. 
Commander Alexander Martin was the accountant for the Iran-contra and drug 



Murder As A Political Act 241 



operations. He said that of about 5,000 people involved in these operations, 400 
have reportedly committed suicide, died from natural causes, or died accidentally. 
Often there was no death certificate, and in 187 cases, the bodies were cremated 
before the families were notified. In 1983 George Perry, a former GM executive 
linked to the Iran-contra arms smuggling, was found with three bullets in his head. 
The CIA and State Department would not cooperate with the New York investiga- 
tors."' Senators examined CIA head William Casey's medical records and autopsy 
to see if he died of natural causes. 21 Oliver North, during his Iran-contra testimony, 
revealed that U.S. agents were holding Iranians as hostages to prevent a double- 
cross. When an American hostage wasn't released as agreed, an Iranian prisoner had 
a heart attack. A double-cross meant a heart attack." 

Cyrus Hashemi, an Iranian arms dealer who tried to assist in the arms-for- 
hostages deal, died mysteriously in London. Documents filed in federal court claim 
U.S. Customs agents believe Hashemi was killed by federal agents to keep secret 
the arms-for-hostages deal. Officially he died from a virulent form of leukemia di- 
agnosed two days before his death, but a chemical or radiation injection or spray 
may have been used." 

Another suspicious death occurred when Willie Velasquez died in 1988. 
Newsweek called his death untimely! Velasquez was extremely effective in re- 
gistering Hispanic voters and was going to be deputy campaign manager for the 
Dukakis presidential campaign. Reporters said his death weeks after he suddenly 
became ill from a virulent form of cancer damaged Dukakis's chances to win Texas 
and California." 

On August 8, 1989 Frank Chikane, an anti-apartheid leader and general-secre- 
tary of the South African Council of Churches, said tests at the University of 
Wisconsin showed someone tried to poison him by contaminating his clothes 
with a toxic chemical. The Baltimore Sun recently reported that South Africa's 
Truth Commission had seen evidence that in 1985 a CIA agent, Millard Shirley, 
came to South Africa to work for Telcom, the government communications 
agency. He brought "highly classified Pentagon manuals on psychological war- 
fare." This included a recipe for prussic acids which when inhaled caused a massive 
coronary leaving few traces. 

In November, 1989 Playboy interviewed an admitted hit-man who reported 
that certain people died of stomach cancer while imprisoned because of their food. 
In prison death by unknown causes is 50 times more common than in the general 
population." Wilhelm Reich, a prominent psychiatrist and researcher who was 
jailed by the FDA, died in prison of "heart complications" two months before his 
parole. A manuscript he wrote in prison disappeared, and he told his wife that 
when he asked for an aspirin he was instead given two pink pills. Jack Ruby 
quickly developed cancer and died while in prison after killing Lee Harvey Oswald. 

While assassination techniques have certainly changed over the decades, the 
old-fashioned hands-on approach is still used. Bob Fletcher of the Montana Militia 
got entangled with the CIA when his toy company was taken over for gun smug- 
gling, and there was an attempt on his life. Someone drove a car through a wall in 
Fletcher's house. When that didn't hurt him the person got out of the car and in an 
apologetic manner shook Fletcher's hand several times and touched him on the 
back of the neck. About 18 hours later, Fletcher had a major heart attack which 
tests showed had been chemically induced. A dust that is absorbed through the skin 
was used. 2 " 



242 Treason The New World Order 



With many of these deaths you cannot be certain if the death was murder or a 
natural or accidental death, which is why these methods are very effective. Various 
federal operatives will threaten or kill people using a variety of techniques. Books 
like Operation Mind Control document that mind control techniques and drugs are 
used, sometimes even on children, to make people become assassins. If the 
country one day learns how many people have been murdered by the secret 
government there will be a great shock. The Constitution offers little protection 
against our death squads. 



243 



Chapter XIX 

Radiation Biological and Chemical 
Experiments on People 



"The fallout settled on virtually uninhibited land." 

Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) 

"The more complete the despotism, the more smoothly all things move on the 
surface." 

Elizabeth Stanton 



On December 7, 1993 Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary announced that some 
people were exposed to radiation in various government-supported experiments. In 
late June, 1994 the Energy Department said that until 1989, about 1,200 people 
took part in 48 undisclosed radiation experiments, often without even being 
warned of the dangers. On October 21, 1994 the President's Advisory Committee 
on Human Radiation Experiments revealed that there had been many more inten- 
tional releases of radiation into the air than had previously been known. Instead of 
13 known releases there were hundreds of deliberate releases. The committee also 
announced that there had been many more experiments on people between 1944 
and 1974 than had previously been announced. 

That Secretary of Energy Hazel O'Leary stepped forward is the main reason 
why this story received national coverage. O'Leary was probably influenced by 
Eileen Welsome's three-part scries, "The Plutonium Experiment" in The Albu- 
querque Tribune November 15-17, 1993. Previously there was only limited cover- 
age of these sanctioned atrocities, although considerable material was available by 
1986. ' In 1969 The Archives of General Psychiatry discussed radiation exper- 
iments involving humans. The Washington Post gave brief coverage to a similar 
story in 1971. In 1980 Congress issued a report "The Forgotten Guinea Pigs," 
concluding that "the AEC chose to secure, at any cost, the atmospheric nuclear 
weapons testing program rather than to protect the health and welfare of the 
residents of the area who lived downwind from the site." 2 In 1981 Mother Jones 
reported that NASA-funded radiation experiments took place for 14 years at Oak 
Ridge Institute an AEC clinic' In 1986 Rep. Edward Markey failed to get the 
government to release documents on these experiments. He released a report 
"American Nuclear Guinea Pigs" detailing government human radiation experi- 
ments on nearly 700 people, saying that "American citizens thus became nuclear 
calibration devices for experimenters run amok...." The victims "were captive 
audiences or populations that some experimenters frighteningly might have con- 
sidered 'expendable."" 

On December 15, 1994, the New York Times reported that, as early as 1947, 
fear of lawsuits, bad publicity, and poor labor relations motivated officials to keep 



244 Treason The New World Order 



secret radiation experiments on people. These experiments were not isolated 
events. They were part of a broad and planned program that was debated at the 
highest levels of government. National security was often not a primary concern.' 
On January 18, 1995, it was reported that some people injected with radioactive 
material, including plutonium, were not even terminally ill. They often did not 
have "cancer, and may not even have been chronically ill. They were doing exper- 
iments of unknown risk on people who potentially had a full, long life ahead of 
them." One victim was 18 years old. Often people were not informed that they 
were being experimented on." In February, 1995 the Energy Department's Office of 
Human Radiation Experiments reported that 9,000 Americans, including children 
and newborns were used in 154 radiation tests on humans. Retarded children were 
fed radioactive breakfast cereal, prisoners had their testicles irradiated, and pregnant 
women were given radioactive iron. Some children were given radioactive injec- 
tions, while the parents were told they were being given vitamin supplements. On 
August 19, 1995 the Energy Department said 16,000 people were in these radia- 
tion experiments.' The total number of victims is probably much higher than 
16,000, but CIA and military records are not available for review. By the early 
1960s, 500,000 radioisotopes had been distributed to doctors and universities." 

That many of these people weren't told they were exposed to radiation violated 
the Nuremberg Code established in response to Nazi atrocities. The victims were 
usually poor, uneducated, often black, and had a low IQ. Testimony revealed that 
some victims experienced extreme pain. Lenore Fenn testified that she watched an 
unsedated Jacob Leftin in agony when his skull was opened exposing the brain. A 
doctor told her he "would not remember the pain as pain." To this day a doctor 
involved in this atrocity defends his work just as Nazi doctors did. The U.S. gov- 
ernment has sanctioned the torture of its citizens in the name of national security. 
How far we have fallen to allow this foreign government in Washington, D.C. to 
so abuse us. And similar radiation experiments continue today. The president's in- 
vestigating committee said that of 125 recent government-funded human research 
proposals, 31 percent were "ethically unacceptable." In 1995, 1,077 institutions 
received almost S5 billion for research projects.' 

Since this story first broke, the CIA said it found only one instance of 
radiation testing on humans. However, Scott Breckenridge, a former CIA official, 
said that in 1972 Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, head of the chemical section of the CIA's 
Technical Services Division, destroyed many files including secret human radiation 
experiments." In 1975 the Rockefeller Commission said the CIA may have 
conducted radiation experiments on people. 

In 1994 a scientist interviewed on television defended using humans in radia- 
tion experiments because it benefited science. Hitler would have been proud of this 
scientist. One can only imagine what other experiments are now being conducted 
in the name of science and national security, which we may learn about in 30 or 
50 years. For every revelation we read about, how many secrets are being kept? 
The Human Radiation Experiment Committee's final report on October 1, 1995 
only recommended compensating people in a few experiments, found little fault 
with those conducting these experiments, and did not even recommend attempting 
to contact and notify the victims. 

From the late 1940s until 1979, between 250,000 to 400,000 military per- 
sonnel and 150,000 civilians participated in 626 U.S. nuclear explosions. This 
included 235 atmospheric tests. Other victims included over 200,000 U.S. troops 



Radiation Biological and Chemical Experiments on People 245 



who were stationed by Hiroshima and Nagasaki after World War II. Government 
experts said there was no danger from exposure to radiation in these cities. 

Starting in 1951 about 57,000 American troops were stationed in the open, a 
few miles from nuclear test sites and were then ordered to march towards the test 
site usually minutes after the explosion." The 1989 movie N Nightbreakers showed 
actual footage of American troops in this situation. Many of these troops got very 
ill years later from this exposure, but the government resisted recognizing a rela- 
tionship to the tests to help these victims. Oscar Rosen, a commander of the 
National Association of Atomic Veterans, said: "They didn't have to use us as 
guinea pigs in the nuclear warfare experiments and then discard us like expendable 
rats."" Another victim, after years of severe illnesses, said: "All I have ever asked 
is to live like other people. But I cannot help blaming the Government for sub- 
jecting me to nuclear testing without warning me of the potential consequences 
and I will always wonder why it happened." 1 ' 

It is estimated that five million Americans were exposed to toxic levels of 
radiation because of various government programs. Our soldiers were not given 
proper protection during exposure to nuclear tests. They were not volunteers, and 
they were never given accurate information as to the dangers involved. These 
soldiers rarely received medical testing once they left the military, and usually their 
records were lost or destroyed. By the late 1970s, many military personnel com- 
plained about their radiation-related sicknesses, and this became an issue in the 
media and in Congress. 

Marine Major Charles Broudy was directly exposed to radiation from nuclear 
testing. Before he died in 1977 at age 57 of a rare lymphoma, he and his wife filed 
a lawsuit against the government. After his death the lawsuit was consolidated 
with 43 similar suits. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the claims, 
and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case. The Veterans Administration 
(VA) also rejected these claims, because it refused to link these problems to their 
exposure to radiation from these tests, although this has somewhat changed. Fi- 
nally in 1988 Pat Broudy and others convinced Congress to pass the Radiation 
Exposed Veterans Compensation Act that provided veterans with compensation for 
13 types of cancer." 

Even with this new law, specific standards must be met for veterans to receive 
up to $75,000, and other disability payments must then be discontinued. Veterans 
cannot sue the government under the 1950 Feres decision because such suits would 
inhibit "military necessity" and "national security."" Senator John Warner spon- 
sored an amendment giving contractors at the Nevada tests sites the same immu- 
nity that the federal government has. And under a 1988 law, 38 U.S.C. 5904, 
strict limits are placed on the right of veterans to use lawyers in appeals before the 
VA Board of Veterans Appeals. Civilians can collect up to $50,000, but few peo- 
ple filing claims have received any money, and usually the amount paid has been 
quite small. By 1993 14,374 military veterans exposed to these tests had filed 
radiation-related claims, but the VA had verified a relationship of their sickness to 
the tests in only 1,250 cases." The government continues to require proof of ex- 
posure to radiation that is difficult to prove with the poor record keeping. The 
government's solution is to keep calling for more tests while the victims continue 
dying. 

In 1965 the U.S. Public Health Service suggested testing the increase in 
leukemia deaths near the tests sites in southeastern Utah. The AEC said no be- 



246 Treason The New World Order 



cause this might jeopardize nuclear testing, cause adverse public reaction, and 
result in lawsuits. When a House subcommittee investigated these tests in 1979, 
they received testimony that the American people were never told the truth about 
the dangers of these open-air nuclear tests, and that hundreds of thousands of citi- 
zens were treated like guinea pigs. In the 1950s people did not understand the 
health dangers from radiation released from nuclear explosions, and these tests were 
presented as safe, patriotic necessities. Fallout was especially concentrated in rural 
areas of Nevada, Utah, and northern Arizona, where death from leukemia became 
increasingly common. According to a report released by the Government Account- 
ing Office, the government deliberately released radioactive material into populated 
areas to study fallout patterns and the rate of radioactive decay." 

If you want to understand why so many people fear and hate the federal gov- 
ernment, especially in the western states read American Ground Zero: The Secret 
Nuclear War. Here are the words and photos of many victims of open air nuclear 
testing. Read how the Feds destroyed the lives of people like Claudia B. Peterson 
who said: "I see what they've done. I see I've lost a child. I've lost my sister. ...I 
see people dying young from brain tumors and leaving families, and the sorrow, 
and the suffering. ...They are killing us for their own purposes." Josephone 
Simkins said: "I feel we were really used, and I'll never trust our government 
again. ...It's amazing to me that the government could lie that thor- 
oughly. ...They've kept lying and they finally admitted that they caused these 
problems." Ken Pratt said: "(When my son) was born, his face was a massive 
hole. I could see down his throat. ..and it was horrible. I wanted to die. I wanted 
him to die." Glenna Orton said: "We've got a Constitution and a Bill of Rights 
that entitles us all to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We have been used 
for guinea pigs and I just really resent it. ...I think they've taken some of my free- 
dom away. This is kind of like Russia." Irma Thomas summed it up best: "We 
trusted our government, but they considered us expendable...." 

The federal government exposed millions of Americans to these tests in the 
name of national security. The AEC in top secret documents said Utah was "a 
low-use segment of the population." During the testing the AEC worked very hard 
to convince everyone that the tests were safe, despite sudden and widespread cancer 
and mental retardation. Women were often told their cancer was caused by neurosis 
or "housewife syndrome." The government invited people to come and see the 
pretty mushroom cloud, because it was all so safe! Eisenhower reportedly said: 
"We can afford to sacrifice a few thousand people out there in the interest of 
national security." Where in the Constitution does it say that thousands of Ameri- 
cans can be injured or killed by the federal government in the name of national 
security? I haven't found such a hidden clause in the Constitution that allows this, 
and the press never asks about this. 

Part of the problem has been the callous attitude of the AEC. Thomas Murray 
an AEC Commissioner said: "We must not let anything interfere with (these) 
tests — nothing." The AEC even encouraged people to watch nuclear tests to keep a 
positive attitude about the peaceful atom. Dotte Troxell was in a serious radiation 
accident in 1957 while working at an AEC plant. After developing serious radia- 
tion sickness, she was transferred to an AEC clinic and operated on. When she 
awoke and asked what had been done to her, the doctors told her they couldn't tell 
her because of national security!" 



Radiation Biological and Chemical Experiments on People 247 



A typical and disturbing way in which the government deals with citizens is 
presented in The Myths of August, by former Rep. Stewart Udall. As a lawyer 
Udall tried to get government compensation for uranium miners and people who 
lived downwind from nuclear tests. Udall was certain that once the government 
understood how people's lives had been damaged, there would be just compensa- 
tion from the authorities. During his investigation, he obtained documents which 
showed that the government knew uranium mining would be extremely dangerous 
if there wasn't proper ventilation in the mines. Such ventilation was never done, 
and the miners were never informed of the danger. Udall, also a former Secretary of 
the Interior, uncovered information that while the government was telling the 
American people open air nuclear testing was quite safe, it had secret documents 
depicting the side effects of such nuclear testing including cancer, genetic damage, 
and death. According to Udall, this was a classic cover-up. I listened to him being 
interviewed, expressing his deep shock that the government would admit no wrong 
and help these victims." 

The government has strongly fought all lawsuits filed concerning nuclear 
testing or uranium mining. In 1987 U.S. v. Allen reversed a lower court ruling 
making the government immune from such lawsuits. In 1990, the Radiation Ex- 
posure Compensation Act gave civilian victims some compensation, after the 
courts blocked any restitution. The Bush Justice Department worked very hard to 
defeat this bill. The recent revelations of government radiation tests on people has 
brought numerous lawsuits. Federal Judge Sandra Beckwith refused to dismiss one 
suit because the defendants "treated at least 87 of it's citizens as though they were 
laboratory animals." 

The government has been as contemptuous of animals and property rights, as 
it has been with the lives of American citizens. In 1953, 4,500 sheep died in Utah 
and Nevada after being exposed to fallout from a nuclear test. The government 
denied any responsibility. The ranchers lost a 1956 court case, but they won in 
1982 after 20,000 pages of AEC documents were released suggesting that the 
government was aware all along that the testing had killed the sheep. A 1980 
House committee investigation concluded that the AEC had participated in a 
sophisticated cover-up. There was evidence that the sheep were exposed to much 
higher levels of radiation than the government would publicly acknowledge. The 
judge ruled that "fraud was committed by the U.S. Government when it lied, pres- 
sured witnesses and manipulated the processes of the court." However, this verdict 
was thrown out on appeal."' The appeals court judge had worked for a law firm 
that represented the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the directors of the atomic 
tests. 

During the many years of open air nuclear testing in the West, newspapers 
rarely questioned the safety of what was happening. A classic example of media 
bias in covering the nuclear industry was What Happened, which aired March 16, 
1993, on the Three Mile Island accident. Owned by GE, a manufacturer of nuclear 
power plants, this NBC show said most people are now content Debbie Baker, 
who was interviewed for the show, was very angry because they took out of con- 
text what she said and gave a false impression of her opinion. Her son was born 
with Down's syndrome after the accident, and she was paid Sl.l million by 
Metropolitan Edison the local utility. There were almost 200 similar settlements, 
but none of this was discussed on the show. When asked why no experts critical of 



248 Treason The New World Order 



nuclear energy appeared on the show, a producer said the program was entertain- 
ment not journalism. " 

The story is the same with the nuclear weapons industry. "Nothing in our 
past compares to the official deceit and lying that took place in order to protect the 
nuclear industry. In the name of national security, politicians and bureaucrats ran 
roughshod over democracy and morality. Ultimately, the Cold Warriors were will- 
ing to sacrifice their own people in their zeal to beat the Russians."" "Hanford 
(nuclear weapons plant in Washington state) and the other bomb factories were 
allowed to endanger their neighbors and foul the environment because government 
scientists and officials didn't trust the people they served. Coming out of World 
War II, the government maintained its wartime claim to extraordinary se- 
crecy. ...For their part, everyday citizens, motivated by fear of the Soviet menace 
and of an awesome technology, abdicated their responsibility to determine the 
national interest in a time of peace." 2 ' 

On July 11, 1990, Energy Secretary James D. Watkins said at a press confer- 
ence there was clear evidence that thousands of innocent civilians had been exposed 
to dangerous levels of radiation near government nuclear weapons complexes. 
Government documents released partly through the FOIA show that, since the 
1940s, government scientists had been concerned that civilians were being exposed 
to dangerous levels of radiation by the nuclear weapons industry. There were nu- 
merous instances where government officials deliberately concealed or ignored se- 
rious problems. One local citizen by the Hanford nuclear weapons plant said that 
while the world criticized the Soviet Union for not telling the world about the 
Chernobyl accident, our own government had kept the people in the dark for over 
40 years! By 1993, over 4,000 people had become plaintiffs in a lawsuit against 
GE, Du Pont, and Rockwell, the prime contractors at Hanford. 

Throughout the development and use of atomic energy the public was usually 
deceived and lied to, leaving the credibility of the government in doubt. "All along 
the government, under all administrations, has been extremely tender of the inter- 
ests of corporations, feeling that they need to be protected for the sake of economic 
stability."" How the welfare of the people was affected was rarely considered, ex- 
cept when they were occasionally aroused. 

There is little understanding of the long term effects on the millions of people 
exposed to radiation. Government funded studies usually show a low incident of 
cancer for people downwind of nuclear tests, while privately funded studies show 
exactly the opposite. When statistics are used to identify the causes of cancer, 
radiation is never listed. With so many nuclear tests and releases of radiation from 
nuclear energy sites we have all been exposed to levels of radiation that may be 
quite toxic. The Journal of the American Medical Association recently reported 
that baby boomers are three times as likely to have cancer as their grandparents. 
One in three people will die of cancer in the U.S. The Boston Globe reported on 
January 9, 1994 that, according to the International Physicians for the Prevention 
of Nuclear War, there have been 6,290,000 deaths worldwide from exposure to 
nuclear radiation." 

John Gofman, M.D., a scientist who studies radiation and health, found in 
1969 that the government manipulated statistics and underestimated by at least 20 
times the risk of cancer from radiation. He said there is no safe level of radiation. 
The head of the AEC told Gofman they would "get him." He lost his funding at 
the Livermore Laboratory, and the National Cancer Society refused to fund his re- 



Radiation Biological and Chemical Experiments on People 249 



search. Gofman has seen so many government cover-ups that he doesn't "consider 
the Department of Energy a credible agency." Alice Stewart, another radiation 
scientist, found years ago that exposure to radiation in low doses was far more 
dangerous than was understood. Few wanted to believe her research, and she had 
difficulty getting funding.'* 

Approximately 150,000 Americans were deliberately exposed to mustard gas 
and other chemicals during and after World War II. They were forced to take part in 
these tests, threatened with prison if they violated the test secrecy, and were given 
no follow-up medical care even when they got sick. Amazingly, many were given 
"man-break" tests deliberately designed to expose the soldiers to levels of gas that 
would definitely cause illnesses. The intention was to test the equipment and to 
study how well the injured victims could function. Chemical poisons were often 
applied directly to the victims bodies to test the results. 

These veterans rarely got aid from the VA, because there were no official 
records about these tests. For almost 50 years, there was an official policy of 
denying that the tests even took place. In 1980 the National Academy of Sciences 
studied the long-term effects of exposure to chemical-warfare agents for 6,720 
soldiers who had participated in these experiments between 1955-1975. There was 
a statistical correlation between chronic exposure to mustard gas and cancer. One 
report said at least 4,000 soldiers suffered serious injuries from these tests. In 1991 
CBS's 60 Minutes reported on this cover-up, and Rep. Porter Goss tried to get 
benefits for four participants of U.S. Navy mustard-gas tests. The standards re- 
quired by the VA to provide help were lowered; however, problems continue be- 
cause records are often incomplete or missing. 

In the 1950s soldiers were given chemical and biological warfare (CBW) 
agents at Fort Detrick, Md. These troops staged a sitdown strike to learn what they 
were being given so they were replaced by Seventh-Day Adventists volunteers. 
The documentary, Bad Trip in Edgewood, described how over 7,000 U.S. troops 
were exposed to gases and injections often with no advance warning. Powerful 
mind control drugs, such as PCP or angel dust and LSD, were used. During the 
1950s and 1960s, 740 soldiers and 900 civilians were given LSD. The troops were 
never told what they were taking, and they were ordered not to tell anyone about 
these tests. There was no follow-up medical care, and some of these victims suf- 
fered serious physical and mental problems, including nervous breakdowns and 
epilepsy. Even people in mental hospitals were given mind altering drugs without 
their consent, and at least one person, Harold Blauer, died shortly after being given 
a mescaline derivative. Years later his family learned what happened, and after a 15 
year lawsuit, they won $750,000. There were many lawsuits, and in one Supreme 
Court decision, a dissenting judge compared the Edgewood tests to Nazi experi- 
ments. Australia, Canada, and England conducted similar tests during World War 
II, as depicted in a 1989 Australian documentary, Keen As Mustard. At least 1,000 
Canadians were injured and several thousand Australians now receive disability 
payments, because of injuries suffered during these tests." 

During World War II the Japanese developed CBW weapons that were widely 
used against China, and they seriously considered sending them to the U.S. in 
balloons. Some balloons did reach the U.S. with conventional weapons killing at 
least one person. Over 12,000 people died from these Japanese experiments, in- 
cluding some U.S. prisoners of war. On August, 15, 1995 NBC's Dateline had a 
story on these tests. One American veteran who was a victim said they received 



250 Treason The New World Order 



little help and "our government has betrayed us." The U.S. didn't arrest the 
Japanese who conducted these tests in Manchuria. Instead "we helped cover-up the 
human experimentation" in exchange for receiving its data." The U.S. has for 
years worked on perfecting CBW weapons. 

During World War II the U.S. was prepared to use various gases against the 
enemy if U.S. troops were attacked with such weapons, but this was never done. 
In one incident, over 600 U.S. troops were treated for mustard gas exposure when 
a German plane bombed Bari Harbor, Italy on December 2, 1943. A damaged U.S. 
ship accidently released mustard gas, killing 83 troops and almost 1,000 local 
citizens." The U.S. made and sent Phosgene gas to England in 1941, and it al- 
most used poison gas on Iwo Jima and Japan. The U.S. and England planned to 
attack six German cities with anthrax bombs that would have killed half the 
population, but production delays blocked this plan. The widespread use of Agent 
Orange and other CBW agents during the Vietnam War continues to cause great 
suffering for millions of people." 

For years the CIA, in 200 medical schools and mental hospitals, gave diseases 
and chemicals to citizens without their knowledge. The government also released 
CBW agents in many U.S. cities including N.Y., Washington, D.C., and San 
Francisco to see how people were effected. In 1950 in San Francisco, 11 people 
were hospitalized and one person died in an experiment. Relatives of the deceased 
victim learned in a lawsuit that the U.S. conducted 300 open air biological attacks 
across the U.S. between 1950 and 1969. In 1955 the CIA released the whooping 
cough virus in Palmetto, Florida. At least 12 people died. The Army Chemical 
Corps released mosquitoes by Carver Village, an entirely black town, to see if 
they could carry and spread yellow and dengue fever. The tests were a success and 
many people got sick and some died. There were over 40 germ warfare tests again- 
st American citizens. In 1966, the Army dispensed a bacteria in the New York 
City subways. In 1968, the CIA almost poisoned the water supply of the FDA 
headquarters in Washington. In 1969, over a four month period, cadmium sulfide 
was sprayed 115 times in Maryland. Total insanity! During a 1977 congressional 
investigation, the Army admitted conducting hundreds of open air experiments 
with toxic agents." 

In June, 1994 members of Minnesota's congressional delegation tried to get 
answers from the Army about tests of CBW warfare agents over unsuspecting 
Minneapolis residents in 1953. The Army said one agent used, zinc cadmium, was 
considered harmless, but more recent studies have shown it may cause cancer. 
Three women who were exposed to the tests recently came forward to report a 
pattern of sterility, miscarriages, and birth defects." On July 18, 1995, NBC's 
Dateline investigated this atrocity. The tests were conducted by a school, and it 
ruined the health of many. 

As documented in Bad Blood, by James H. Jones, in the notorious "Tuskegee 
Study," 412 black American sharecroppers near Tuskegee, Alabama were studied 
for 40 years, starting in the early 1930s. None of them were ever told they had 
syphilis, because the U.S. Public Health Service wanted to watch the disease de- 
velop. Symptoms included insanity, paralysis, blindness, and death, but they were 
never given penicillin although that was an effective treatment. That would have 
interfered with the study. The program ended in 1972 when a federal employee 
went to the press after his private complaints starting in 1966 went unanswered. 



Radiation Biological and Chemical Experiments on People 251 



The victims received no help until eight months later, just as congressional hear- 
ings began. 

In 1931 numerous Puerto Ricans were deliberately injected with cancer in an 
experiment led by Cornelius Rhoads of the Rockefeller Institute, and 13 died. 
Rhoads wrote in a letter: "The Puerto Ricans are the dirtiest, laziest, most danger- 
ous and thievish race of men ever inhabiting this sphere... I have done my best to 
further the process of extermination by killing off eight and transplanting cancer 
into several more.... All physicians take delight in the abuse and torture of the 
unfortunate subjects." This letter was given by the recipient to the Puerto Rican 
Nationalist Party. Rhoads was investigated but, although he never denied writing 
the letter, the prosecutor said Rhoads was just "a mentally ill person or a man 
with few scruples," so he was never prosecuted. During World War II, Rhoads 
headed two large chemical warfare projects, he had a seat on the AEC, and he 
headed the Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research. Later when many Na- 
tional Party members were imprisoned, they were exposed to radiation, burning, 
poisoning, and experimental drugs.' 1 Here we see the mentality of certain people 
in the secret government. Carefully reflect on this and the great concern the corpo- 
rate elite have today about the population explosion. How many people are there 
like Rhoads, and what would they do in a world dictatorship? 

The U.S. has a long history of using CBW agents and experimental drugs on 
prisoners. The birth control pill was first given to Puerto Rican and Haitian 
women. An American doctor gave Philippine prisoners beriberi and the plague. In 
1915, 12 prisoners in Mississippi were given pellagra, while in the 1940s over 
400 Chicago prisoners were given malaria. Prisoners in Philadelphia were exposed 
to dioxin between 1965 and 1968. As with laboratory animals these tests are done 
to develop weapons or new drugs for the public. During the Nuremberg trials, 
Nazi doctors defended their atrocities by citing some of these American experi- 
ments." 

There have also been experiments to use genetics as a weapon." By 1962, 40 
scientists were working just on genetics at the U.S. Army biological warfare 
laboratories." In 1969 Congress heard testimony about the advantages of this re- 
search. "Within the next 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic 
biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural 
immunity could have been acquired. ...It would probably be possible to make a 
new infective micro-organism which could differ in certain important respects from 
any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be 
refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend 
to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease."" Within a few years, the 
AIDS epidemic began. There is much literature available, such as the works by 
Alan Cantwell, Ir., M.D. and Robert Strecker, M.D., stating that this germ was 
deliberately created, probably at Fort Detrick, but that subject goes beyond the 
scope of this book. Some researchers like Drs. Garth and Nancy Nicholson feel 
genetic research to develop CBW weapons has continued for years." A lawsuit in 
1987 forced the Department of Defense to admit that CBW research was taking 
place in 127 sites about the U.S. Some of these sites are using recombinant DNA 
techniques. 

The Gulf War Syndrone (GWS) is associated with Iraqi CBW and vaccines 
given to U.S. troops. Time magazine said, in late May, 1994, evidence was pre- 
sented before a Senate committee showing that the U.S. government approved the 



252 Treason The New World Order 



sale to Iraq of CBW agents that may have caused GWS." Spider's Web, by Alan 
Friedman, describes this secret U.S. assistance to Iraq. Recently released docu- 
ments suggest that troops were exposed to CBW agents and there is a cover-up. 
Eleven pages released in late January, 1995 by the Pentagon through the FOIA 
show that various CBW attacks on our troops were identified during the war and 
bombed-out Iraqi chemical facilities were located. There were over 1,000 chemical 
alarms during the war but these were all supposedly false reports. Yet the military 
still buys these alarms because they work so well. Former Senator Riegle held 
hearings and issued two reports stating that U.S. and British troops made at least 
21 contacts with chemical agents and there is a cover-up. This report said the allies 
bombed 18 chemical, 12 biological, and 4 nuclear facilities. The government con- 
tinues to deny this exposure, which limits proper medical treatment. 411 As with 
Agent Orange, the government often calls GWS psychological and denies there is 
a physical problem. In September, 1995, Iraq admitted having a much larger germ- 
warfare program than had previously been acknowledged, 41 and in June, 1996 the 
Pentagon finally admitted that some U.S. troops were exposed to Iraqi chemical 
weapons during the Gulf War when a munitions facility was destroyed. 

Marianne Gasior, a Pittsburgh lawyer, has gathered extensive evidence about 
U.S. corporations providing CBW agents to Iraq before the war, and she has 
received death threats. Released Pentagon documents show that the U.S. knew Iraq 
was receiving CBW toxins from various U.S. companies before the war. 45 Peter 
Kawaja has identified companies in Boca Raton, Florida and Houston, Texas that, 
in conjunction with U.S. intelligence, illegally produced poisons that were ex- 
ported to Iraq. Kawaja was working with two of these firms as a security 
specialist, and when he became suspicious he went to the CIA and FBI. He was 
told that these people were terrorists who were going to be arrested. He gathered 
evidence that U.S. politicians and intelligence agents were improperly working 
with these companies. On July 16, 1990, he sent a message about this to the 
National Security Agency. Soon eight armed federal agents, without showing a 
search warrant, raided his business seizing documents. This "evidence" was sealed 
under a war powers act because of national security, and he started receiving the 
first of many death threats. 

Under the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972, it is illegal to make, ex- 
periment with, distribute, or sell germs for warfare. Kawaja believes that James 
Baker III, George Bush, and John Deutch (now head of the CIA) have business ties 
to U.S. firms that provided CBW agents to Iraq. Kawaja filed a lawsuit in federal 
court against various federal agents for obstruction of justice, misleading a federal 
grand jury, threatening a witness, and other charges. Part of the government de- 
fense was that it has an ongoing investigation and it has immunity. On October 
19, 1995 the suit was dismissed, so perhaps the Feds do have the right to commit 
crimes that kill thousands of Americans. 4 ' Since large U.S. corporations supported 
the enemy during World War II, it should not surprise the objective observer that 
similar activities continue today. The Justice Department, under Bush and Clinton, 
has refused to bring charges against these corporations. 

While CBS's 60 Minutes on March 12, 1994 said over 50,000 Gulf War vet- 
erans are sick, some feel the number is much higher. Joyce Riley, a nurse active 
in helping those with GWS, said 7,000 Gulf War veterans have died and over 
200,000 are sick. 44 These ill troops would have difficulty defending the U.S. The 
Senate has found evidence that GWS is contagious with 78 percent of the spouses 



Radiation Biological and Chemical Experiments on People 253 



and 25 percent of the children affected. 4 ' GWS is airborne and spreads by non-sex- 
ual but continued close contact. One Senate committee last year found that 65 per- 
cent of the children conceived by Gulf War veterans have birth defects. 

The vaccines and drugs U.S. troops were given before going to the Gulf vio- 
lated the Nuremberg Code. People aren't supposed to be given experimental drugs 
even during war without their informed consent. The Pentagon said it wasn't pos- 
sible to get informed consent from combat troops so it obtained a waiver from the 
FDA to give the troops these chemicals. Soldiers who resisted the injections were 
forcibly given them, which is unethical and unlawful. The New York Times called 
these troops guinea pigs." In 1996 Clinton's Advisory Committee on Gulf War 
Veterans Illnesses said the waiver obtained from the FDA should become perma- 
nent. 

The military has treated people investigating GWS quite harshly. An Army 
reservist, Dr. Yolanda Huet-Vaughn, refused to give these experimental vaccines 
per the Nuremberg Code and she was court-martialed. Sentenced to 30 months in 
jail, this mother of three children was released after eight months. U.S. Depart- 
ment of Agriculture scientist Dr. Jim Moss was fired for investigating DEET, an 
insect repellant, to see if it was connected to the GWS. Soldiers, like Navy 
Reserve Capt. Julia Dyckman who gathered evidence on GWS, have been harassed 
by the military. Some Gulf veterans in the National Guard have been discharged 
for complaining about illnesses, and the records of many Gulf veterans have been 
deliberately destroyed." 

Drs. Nancy and Garth Nicholson have isolated one of the biological causes of 
GWS, and have successfully treated many." It is a laboratory modified my- 
coplasma, as shown by the highly unusual DNA sequence, and was probably 
given to troops during the vaccines. Over the years, few have researched my- 
coplasma, the laboratories in the U.S. studying it often had Iraqi technicians, and 
mycoplasma is a highly classified germ warfare agent. Two weeks before the Gulf 
War started, the U.S. Commerce Department stopped shipping mycoplasma to the 
Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission. The CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency 
(DIA) tried to stop the Nicholsons' work. DIA agents went to their hospital warn- 
ing them to stop their research, but they refused. Publication of their articles has 
been blocked, and their mail, phones, and faxes have been repeatedly intercepted. 

Through a contact in the Justice Department, Garth Nicholson heard there is a 
secret eugenics directive in various East Coast laboratories, and friends at several 
laboratories confirmed this. Perhaps this is why U.S. troops were given these 
toxic vaccines. The Nicholsons also have evidence that these illegal toxins were 
tested in certain prisons. Information was leaked to them partly because some 
people involved in these criminal activities got sick, and they came to the Nichol- 
sons for treatment. Although they have given interviews to the national media, 
each report was suppressed. 4 ' Garth Nicholson has written 400 scientific papers, 
edited 13 books, been nominated for the Nobel prize, and is editor or associate 
editor of 13 scientific and medical journals. 

Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) is a highly toxic chemical that the EPA 
is forcing states and cities to use in gasoline, and the percentage of MTBE that 
goes into gasoline is being increased. Oil companies are promoting this chemical 
to increase their profits. It evaporates in the air causing serious respiratory, 
neurological, and allergic problems. Readily soluble in water, it is now found in 
ground water. A prominent Italian scientist, Dr. Maltoni, found that MTBE caused 



254 Treason The New World Order 



cancer in animals. Dangerous chemical reactions, such as formaldehyde and tertiary 
butyl formate occur when MTBE is used. When it was introduced in Fairbanks, 
Alaska up to 50 percent of the population promptly got sick. The Centers for 
Disease Control (CDC) brought in doctors who said MTBE was the cause. The 
EPA rejected these findings, and blocked the CDC from conducting further 
investigations. The governor ordered removal of the chemical in all gasoline sold 
in the state, despite EPA threats to withdraw federal funds, and symptoms 
promptly disappeared. The same thing happened in Missoula, Montana and Stam- 
ford, Connecticut although fewer people were affected than in Alaska. Over 16,000 
people signed petitions to remove MTBE from gasoline sold in New Jersey, and 
this poison has been banned in N.C. and parts of Pennsylvania and New York." 

Millions of Californians have been exposed to the pesticide malathion thro- 
ugh widespread airborne spraying. This was supposedly done to protect crops, and 
there are plans to use it in other states. Other methods of medfly control have been 
underutilized, while malathion was mainly sprayed over populated areas, not over 
crops. In 1989-1990, 509,583 pounds of malthion were used. It causes numerous 
health problems, and its toxicity greatly increases when used as a spray. Malathion 
is in the chemical family developed by I.G. Farben to subdue or kill people, and it 
was used in the concentration camps." In the summer of 1988, The Oregonian did 
a nine-part series about CIA front companies such as Evergreen Helicopters. 
Through a front company, the CIA was directly involved in spraying malathion 
over Southern California. Why is the CIA interested in exposing millions of 
citizens to this poison? Why does the government allow the widespread use of 
pesticides that are so toxic to our health? 

Fluoridated water causes diseases such as Down's Syndrome, heart, kidney, 
cancer, bone, and liver problems." Eleven European countries and 200 U.S. cities 
have banned its use. Court cases have established the toxic effects of fluoridation. 
In the 1970s Congress was shocked to learn that the National Cancer Institute 
(NCI) had never tested fluoride for cancer. The NCI took 12 years to conduct these 
tests, which demonstrated a sharply higher incident of bone and joint cancer in 
regions with water fluoridation. The U.S. hip-fracture rate is now the world's 
highest and even the Journal of the American Medical Association magazine on 
August 12, 1992 blamed water fluoridation. 

Nazi and Soviet researchers found that fluoride created a docile, sheep-like 
obedience and demeanor, so it was used in prison camps. Charles Perkins was sent 
to Germany by the U.S. to help run I.G. Farben, the giant chemical corporation, 
after World War II. In 1954 he wrote the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research: 
"The German chemists worked out an ingenious and far-reaching plan of mass 
control. ...Sodium fluoride occupied a prominent place. ...The real purpose behind 
water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination, control, 
and loss of liberty." Today many tranquilizer drugs like daladorm are made from 
fluoride compounds. In a recent government report "The Revolution in Military 
Affairs and Conflict Short of War" future strategies are suggested. Drugged food 
would be supplied to Cuba to subdue the population and lower the incident of anti- 
government activity. 

There is a second purpose behind the introduction of fluoride. The fluoride 
found in nature is calcium fluoride, while the type used in our water is sodium 
fluoride, which is a waste product from the aluminum industry. In the past there 
were numerous lawsuits over this poison, so the aluminum industry used propa- 



Radiation Biological and Chemical Experiments on People 255 



ganda, money, and political influence to turn a chemical used in rat poison into a 
product we all needed. Then large corporations could sell a toxic waste and earn 
more profit. The aluminum giant ALCOA was owned by Andrew Mellon, and its 
chief attorney Oscar R. Ewing took a senior public health job in Washington in 
1946 to promote water fluoridation. The Safe Water Foundation is working to 
stop fluoridation." 

In recent years food irradiation has become increasingly common. Foods are 
exposed to radiation supposedly to kill various microorganisms. This may pre- 
serve food longer, but it also damages the chemical structure of food creating free 
radicals including benzene which causes cancer. Irradiating food also causes muta- 
tions in viruses and bacteria in food, producing more resistant strains, and some 
vitamins and nutrients are destroyed. A 1979 review of food irradiation literature 
found hundreds of adverse effects in animals." Animals fed irradiated food develop 
kidney damage, lowered growth rates, lowered birth rates, tumors, immune system 
damage, and genetic mutations. Government committees ignored this evidence be- 
cause of political pressure to approve food irradiation. At a recent food irradiation 
conference sponsored by the World Health Organization, the U.S. worked to 
expand food irradiation. The FDA reviewed 441 studies and eliminated all but five 
of them because of poor quality. Even these five studies had problems, but this 
weak evidence was used to approve further food irradiation. Radiation is also used 
to sterilize medical equipment, sanitary napkins, and tampons." As with fluorida- 
tion the radiation used to irradiate food is an industry waste product. Food and 
Water, Inc. has been leading the fight to stop food irradiation." 

As with fluoride in water and radiation in food, sewage sludge is another in- 
dustrial waste that has been added to our food supply. Farmers are using toxic 
sewage sludge as a fertilizer to grow crops. The Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) has already reclassified sewer sludge as an unregulated fertilizer, and it is 
being sold commercially with no monitoring. This sewage may contain highly 
toxic chemicals and biological toxins, but it increases corporate profits. The EPA 
has provided $300,000 to the Water Environment Federation (WEF) "to educate 
the public" about the "beneficial uses" of sludge. The WEF, which is the industry 
lobby group for sewage treatment plants, and the EPA want farmers and food pro- 
cessors to use sewage sludge as a "beneficial fertilizer." The water industry says 
sewage is not toxic and calls it "biosolids."" The book, Toxic Sludge Is Good For 
You, discusses this outrage. 

A fourth atrocity that will shortly be perpetrated against the American people 
is the introduction of genetically engineered foods that contains genes derived from 
fish, insects, pigs, viruses, and bacteria. The FDA will not require labels on 
genetically engineered foods, although such foods has already injured people. 
Genetically engineered soybeans, mixed with a brazil nut protein, caused a severe 
allergic reaction. No one is sure that this food will be safe, and mixing human and 
animal or insect genes may cause many problems in the coming decades. 
However, the biotech industry has sufficient political power to manipulate the 
government to increase profits. 

Bovine Growth Hormone (BGH) has recently been added to milk, and the 
Monsanto Corporation took legal action to scare small companies into not label- 
ing their milk BGH free. Cows fed BGH get udder infections and more antibiotics 
are used, which get into our food supply. Some cows even die." BGH increases 
milk production, which will force small farms out of business, and help shift milk 



256 Treason The New World Order 



and dairy production to South America to raise corporate profits as NAFTA un- 
folds. BGH is being used to help introduce other genetically engineered foods. The 
Union of Concerned Scientists issued a report calling for this to be stopped until 
the ecological consequences are understood. The long-term health effects are also 
not understood. The European Council of Ministers has banned BGH use until 
2000, and the Pure Food coalition has been fighting to remove this chemical from 
milk." 

Aspartame used in Nutra Sweet™ is another chemical associated with the 
Nazis. The Pentagon once listed it as a prospective biochemical weapon. Re- 
searchers have connected this chemical with a remarkable number of illnesses. A 
study by the National Institutes of Health, Adverse Effects of Aspartame, listed 
167 reasons not to take it. It erodes memory, depresses intelligence, and is another 
substance that helps subdue and control a population. Alex Constantine has 
documented numerous lies between Monsanto Corporation, the main patent holder 
of aspartame, the CIA, and Nazi corporations involved in germ warfare.* 11 A 
consumer group has released The Deadly Deception and is working to ban this 
chemical." 

The government is deliberately exposing us to more and more chemical, 
radiation, and biological agents. With the corporate elite so concerned about popu- 
lation growth, are there deliberate plans to reduce the world's population through 
the use of various poisons? In examining these insidious programs, consider the 
horrific statements made by individuals in Chapter IV about our overpopulated 
planet. People should get involved to stop these deadly programs. 



257 



Chapter XX 
Restoring Constitutional Government 



"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on occasion that I wish it to 
be always kept alive. ...What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not 
warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance." 

Thomas Jefferson 

"There will never be a free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize 
the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power 
and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. ...Government is best which 
governs least." Henry David Thoreau 



Three major issues now face the American people. First, how long will it 
take for the people to fully awaken to the corruption and treason that has continued 
for so many years. How many people have to be awakened before there is a 
massive response. People don't yet realize how bad things are partly because the 
news is so controlled and censored. A Republic can gradually be destroyed from 
apathy and indifference. For change to take place people must first recognize that 
there is a problem. Jerry Brown said: "The increasing enslavement of the people is 
only possible because people don't see what is happening." The one world gov- 
ernment would destroy all that America has stood for. 

In 1990 I took a three week group tour of the Soviet Union. Just after arriv- 
ing I asked our Soviet tour guide if she was a member of the communist party. 
She responded as if I had insulted her. Every government guide and many local 
people we spoke to disliked or hated the communist parly because of what it had 
done to the country. I concluded that the entire system would soon collapse, so I 
wasn't surprised when this happened the next year. 

I now have a similar feeling regarding the disgust that millions feel about 
what is happening to America. Too many things have gone wrong with the eco- 
nomic, political, spiritual, and social fabric of the nation, and word is getting out. 
This doesn't necessarily mean that the entire system will collapse, although that 
wouldn't surprise me, but I do believe that things cannot continue too much 
longer as they are. Either those promoting the one world government will attempt 
to seize all guns, to establish an open dictatorship, and start arresting thousands of 
people, or the people and the military will restore the Constitution. More and 
more people are disgusted with politics as usual in America. 

While in the Soviet Union I met a few people who thought communism and 
the Soviet Union were wonderful. People supposedly had all the freedoms one 
could want, with a high standard of living. This is what the government and the 
media said, so how could it be otherwise? In America we receive the same assur- 



258 Treason The New World Order 



ances from the state and the national media, so how can one disagree? However, 
the problem for the government is that it has lost control of information. 

Second, what will the people do when they realized how dangerous the federal 
government has become? All our rights are now threatened, and the economic fab- 
ric of the country has been seriously weakened. This is the first generation that 
will not do as well economically as the previous generation, and the middle class 
is increasingly threatened economically. Millions of Americans are having serious 
problems getting decent jobs. Yet for most people, economic conditions are not 
that severe, certainly not to a degree that history has shown would cause a revolu- 
tion. However, the American revolution is perhaps the only successful revolution 
in history that took place even though there was general economic well-being. 
Americans are used to freedom. 

We have a new situation that is unique to history. As the Tofflers have said in 
The Third Wave, it is now much easier to access much more information. Today, 
we live in an age of mass communications with computers, faxes, and portable 
phones. While the main forms of mass communications are controlled by the 
corporate elite, it is possible to get messages out in many other ways such as at 
meetings, talk radio, bulletin boards, and through the alternative press in journals 
and books. Because of desktop publishing in the mid 1980s, many new small 
presses opened so much more information on many topics now gets published. As 
people learn the truth, the corrupt power structure is crumbling. 

The third and most important issue is, will the people wake up before it is 
too late? Will enough people wake up to what is happening in time to prevent an 
open dictatorship. Over the decades the elitists have often said they want to estab- 
lish a one world government in the future. The corporate elite may move beyond 
gradually tighten control over the people, because many want to dismantle the 
federal government, and resistance to the new world order is growing. On Septem- 
ber 14, 1994 David Rockefeller addressed a UN function declaring "But this present 
'window of opportunity,' during which a truly peaceful and interdependent World 
Order might be built, will not be open for long. Already there are powerful forces 
at work that threaten to destroy all of our hopes and efforts to erect an enduring 
structure of global cooperation.'" Recently, in the context of enhancing UN 
power, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. said: "We are not going to achieve a new world 
order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and money." 2 

For years influential people have said phony excuses, as done with the two 
world wars and the depression, should be used to enhance government power to 
create the one world government. For instance, the U.S. State Department com- 
missioned a study (contract No. SCC 28270) A World Effectively Controlled by 
the United Nations by Lincoln Bloomfield. The study said a world government 
would take hundreds of years to evolve naturally, but a crisis, a "series of sudden, 
nasty, and traumatic shocks" such as a war, could bring about a world government 
in short order. Excuses discussed include: economic collapse, diseases, terrorism, 
racial riots, food shortages, or another war. These and other threats are openly de- 
bated among the ruling elite, and they will probably use some combination of 
threats to achieve control. The sharp rise in oil prices may be an early sign of 
what is coming. Some claim that the militias will be attacked and martial law will 
be declared. One cannot state exactly when a phony emergency will be created, but 
if Clinton is reelected there may well be an economic catastrophe to enhance gov- 
ernment power. In addition, there is already a severe world-wide grain shortage 



Restoring Constitutional Government 259 



from a drought, a wheat fungus is destroying much of our wheat crop, and the 
Wall Street Journal recently said we may soon be required to sign up with one 
store and one restaurant annually to buy all our food from for the coming year. If 
this article is not a parody as is claimed, are you prepared for this control?' 
Reportedly, people in the military are not prepared to live in such a controlled 
society. 

There are powerful elements in the military determined to uphold the Con- 
stitution and protect the people. Many officers now understand the treason and 
corruption that has taken place for many years. Gary Allen, in several books, said 
senior military intelligence officers were aware of the corporate international net- 
work that seeks to enslave the world. The military may openly intervene, perhaps 
after a period of intense civil strife, to arrest key political, business, and media 
leaders charging them with treason and sedition. It may shock some to speak of 
this, but people in the military take an oath to "support, and defend the Constitu- 
tion of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..." This is an 
oath most in the military take with great seriousness. Our government was 
established by the people, and if the government becomes destructive, it can be 
altered or abolished by the people. The first duty of a soldier is to protect the 
Constitution and the people. 4 

There has long been a quiet stand-off between the military and the secret gov- 
ernment. Each watches the other with a full range of surveillance activities used. 
The secret government has tried to politicize the military command with officers 
who support the new world order. Active duty officers are allowed to serve on 
corporate boards. For years some senior officers have belonged to the CFR, the 
new head of the CIA wants full control over the military intelligence agencies' 
budgets, and in April, 1996 it was reported that the CIA head may appoint the 
heads of the other intelligence agencies.' CIA leadership has always been an asset 
of the secret government, while military intelligence is the eyes used by the 
military command to watch the corporate traitors. In researching this book I have 
more than once spoken to people in direct contact with those in the military who 
are determined to defend the Constitution, and I have learned that many people are 
aware of this stand-off. An obvious danger is that Wall Street will create another 
foreign war such as in Korea or the Middle East. If many U.S. troops were sent 
overseas, they would not be readily available to protect the people if a phony 
martial law was established in the U.S. 

A hint of the growing anger in the military was revealed in March, 1996 
when several sources, including Strategic Investments, said the Pentagon had 
completed a study of the Oklahoma bombing showing that five bombs had ex- 
ploded, McVeigh was peripherally involved as a "useful idiot," and the operation 
had a Middle East "signature." Clinton and the FBI do not want federal agencies 
conducting independent investigations of that event, especially when the conclu- 
sions disagree with the party line. The death of Admiral Boorda may be one sign 
of tension. Boorda, who had many family ties with Oklahoma, may have quietly 
assisted in investigating the Oklahoma bombing cover-up. Also, Boorda was Jew- 
ish, and in Judaism suicide is strictly forbidden. The official reason for his suicide 
is ridiculous. About his combat V medals, Secretary of the Navy John Dalton 
said: "I cannot imagine why he fell it would be difficult to explain." Hopefully, in 
the future, independent experts will examine his "suicide notes" as with the Foster 
death. 



260 Treason The New World Order 



That the corporate elite has long understood the problem of dealing with a 
loyal military is implied in the work of Samuel P. Huntington, founder and long 
time contributor to Foreign Policy. He is a key thinkers for the corporate elite. In 
September, 1956 in the American Political Science Review, he wrote an article 
"Civilian Control and the Constitution." He complained about the difficulty con- 
trolling the militia. In 1957 he wrote The Soldier and the State concerning civilian 
control of the military. That most officers in the U.S. military remain loyal to the 
Constitution is a problem the secret government has never resolved. The growing 
anger of the military may be one reason why so many in Congress are retiring. 

Direct intervention by the military is just one possible scenario. This quiet 
stand-off may continue for many years. The military may refuse to act if it sees 
that the secret government is not willing to establish an open dictatorship, and 
individuals in the secret government may recognize that they could lose everything 
if they move beyond gradually tightening control over the people. However, the 
ruling elite may act because of a fear that they may be arrested and charged with 
treason and sedition, as more people learn of their activities. The wild card in all 
this is the American people. It is difficult to see how things can continue 
indefinitely without an explosion. The current situation is much more volatile 
than most Americans understand, which is one reason why the Feds were so 
cautious in arresting the Freeman. 

Two college professors in 1977 wrote American Politics: Policies, Power and 
Change in which they predicted that corporate-banking control of America may 
lead to "a corporatist system in which the major corporations dominate." This will 
ultimately create great tension and "a general chaos." Professor Arthur Miller, in 
Democratic Dictatorship, said: "Some type of authoritarianism, perhaps of totali- 
tarianism, seems to be inevitable. ...The U.S. may be on a collision course with 
disaster. ...No one should be confident that the movement can be halted...." The 
dictatorship that is coming under the ruling elite may be done in the name of 
democracy with a "Constitution of control.'" In The Secret Constitution and the 
Needfor Constitutional Change, which was done with the aid of the Rockefeller 
Foundation, Miller said: "Constitutional alteration will come whether or not it is 
liked or planned for.. ..We need a new republic. ...Ours is the age of the planned 
society, as any number of post-World War II developments attest. No other way is 
possible." 

We are now in a period equivalent to the early 1770s. In 1770 the British 
killed some colonists in Boston, and over the next few years, people gradually 
understood that freedom would be protected only by fighting the British. We have 
had Waco and Ruby Ridge. On talk radio every day the deep anger and hatred to- 
ward the federal government is obvious, and increasingly people reluctantly ac- 
knowledge that a fight is coming to stop the Feds from destroying our rights. Art 
Bell, a popular radio talk show host, discussed this issue on one program and 
many agreed with him that a fight is coming. When the American people are 
sufficiently aroused great and violent change can result. America was colonized by 
armed religious radicals, and this Republic was founded through violent revolu- 
tion. 

History teaches that the secret government will not back down. In 1857 
Frederick Douglass warned: "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never 
did, and it never will. ...Find out just what people will submit to and you have 
found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon 



Restoring Constitutional Government 261 



them. These will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or 
with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom 
they oppress." The bankers and large corporations won't give up power and their 
agent, the Democrat/Republican party, desperately clings to big government. 

Various issues may soon bring things to a head. The nation is already 
bankrupt with gimmicks being used to delay and deny this reality. Soon interest 
payments for the national debt will be larger than all income taxes collected. There 
is no ability to repay the principle. Medicare and the social security system can 
not continue much longer without major changes. Senator Bob Kerrey said: "We 
are on a course toward national bankruptcy." By 2012, he believes, there will be 
absolutely no money left for education, highways, children's programs, or national 
defense. According to the Bipartisan Commission on Entitlement and Tax Reform, 
by 2003 entitlements and interest payments on the debt will rise from 61 to 72 
percent of the budget and take the entire federal budget by 2012.' The 1995 budget 
states that in the next generation the tax rate will be 82 percent. According to 
Alice Rivlin director of the budget office, by 2030 the debt will increase $4.1 
trillion a year. No nation can survive this. 

Blinded by a lust for money and power, the government continues taking 
actions that angers the people. Whether under health reform or immigration con- 
trol, the push for a national I.D. continues. CIA drug trafficking, and scandals like 
the S&L crisis, Iran-contra, and Whitewater continue. The 1994 election showed 
that the American people want less government intrusion in their lives. Instead 
many new edicts and bills are presented that tighten control over the people. This 
has caused growing disillusionment with our political system. GATT and NAFTA 
seriously threaten U.S. sovereignty. Our patent laws are being changed to support 
transnational corporations. To support the Omnibus Counter-Terrorism Act, FBI 
director Louis Freeh recommended supervising any groups "advocating social or 
political change." This law destroys part of the Bill of Rights. Few congressmen 
got calls from constituents urging passage of this bill while many citizens tried to 
block it. On April 15, 1996 Anthony Lewis in the New York Times said there 
was "no need or public demand" for its passage. 

Federal power continues to grow, despite Clinton's claim that the era of big 
government is over. There is little response from government representatives to 
the just demands of the people. On the one hand you have an increasingly oppres- 
sive and nervous government with utterly ruthless elements. Opposing them are 
millions of citizens, many armed, who are determined to protect the Constitution. 
The drive to register and then seize all guns continues unabated, and millions of 
Americans will not allow this to happen. Whenever you demonize and deny 
political expression to millions of people, anger builds and a violent response be- 
comes increasingly possible. If Clinion wins reelection and the Democrats capture 
both houses, a period of direct confrontation will be much more likely. 

Recently, a federal judge illegally banned the distribution of a book, Why We 
Will Never Win the War on AIDS, by Bryan Ellison and Peter Duesberg, and then 
he ordered its destruction. The establishment doesn't want the people to learn the 
truth about AIDS." As in Nazi Germany, book burning will become increasingly 
common in the new world order. Judicial tyranny is a growth industry. 

A sign of what is coming is Rep. Schumer's bill H.R. 2580. This CFR 
member wants to stop what he calls "baseless conspiracy theories regarding the 
government...." While such speech is protected by the First Amendment, the 



262 Treason The New World Order 



secret government is getting increasingly nervous as the Patriot movement grows. 
In addition, on November 16, 1993 the Religious Freedom Restoration Act be- 
came Public Law 103-141. This law declares that "governments should not sub- 
stantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification." For over 
200 years we had full religious freedom under the First Amendment. Now suddenly 
the government quietly passes a law, in violation of the Constitution, which au- 
thorizes it to block religious expression if it feels justified. In FDR, My Exploited 
Father-in-Law, C.B. Dall said the corporate elite "now plan to uproot and to grad- 
ually destroy the Spiritual background of all people. Initially, Christianity is the 
prime target, then Judaism, then all other religions! That bleak program is abso- 
lutely necessary for them. ..to make assembly-line puppets out of us, the many.'" 

In education, the Careers Act (H.R. 1617 and S 143) has already passed both 
houses and is in committee. Federal control will replace state authority in the 
education system with a national data bank, a national employment service, and 
apprentice system to train and employ people, per the dictates of the corporations. 
Computers will track everyone. Backed by the Carnegie Foundation, this law 
would create a cradle-to-grave national employment system that would be loved in 
any communist nation. 

When you also consider the hundreds of thousands of people jailed for mari- 
juana violations and a similar number of people whose assets have been forfeited, 
often without even being charged with a crime, you begin to appreciate why so 
many people fear and hate the federal government. Moreover, the open air nuclear 
tests and radiation medical experiments killed and injured millions of people. One 
reason why the federal government is so hated in the western states is because so 
many Americans died from exposure to nuclear tests that the government for years 
said were quite safe. The town mortician in St. George, Utah, which is near an 
atmospheric nuclear testing site, buried many children who died of leukemia. He 
said, "They done to us what the Russians couldn't do." Yet journalists for media 
giants ask how people can be angry at the federal government! Each one of these 
victims has friends and relatives, and the anger is building. Ask a Japanese Ameri- 
can, an American Indian, or many black Americans if the federal government can 
be trusted. 

A California newspaper the Mountain Messenger frustrated with continued 
government intrusions said: "We Americans are a proud and independent people 
and we tend to resent anyone telling us what we must do and what we must think. 
We will tend to go along with the government, but only up to a point and for a 
great many proud and independent Americans, that point has been reached and is 
very nearly surpassed." Media Bypass and the Washington Report said numerous 
sources believe we are now in the lull before a storm that may be the greatest up- 
heaval since the Civil War. 10 However, if many more politicians resign and the 
press is filled with charges of corruption, examine whether corporate leaders are 
also indicted and jailed. The secret government may attempt to deflect the people's 
anger by sacrificing some crooked politicians. 

People like William Greider, in Who Will Tell the People, and the books by 
Kevin Phillips explain how the people are today powerless and cut off from the 
political decision-making processes in America. What they do not really discuss is 
that, once a government represents the moneyed interests instead of the people, 
that government can become extremely dangerous. It is not just that the people 
have become politically powerless, our rights are being lost. It is time to stop 



Restoring Constitutional Government 263 



trusting the federal government and recognize that it has become the enemy of the 
people. To change reality, it must first be accepted. 

Gore Vidal is one of the few prominent social commentators who understands 
the growing potential for a police state and a violent response. "Unfortunately, the 
people are without alternatives. That is what makes the situation so volatile and 
potentially dangerous." 11 "We are now in a prerevolutionary time. ...In due course, 
something on the order of the ethnic rebellions in the Soviet Union or even of the 
people's uprising in China will lake place here. Too few have ripped off too many 
for too long. Opinion (mass media) can no longer disguise the contradiction at the 
heart of conservative-corporate opinion. The corporate few are free to do what they 
will, while the many are losing their freedoms at a rapid rate." When discussing 
the growing loss of our freedoms Vidal said "Should the few persist in their efforts 
to dominate the private lives of the many, I recommend force as a means of 
changing their minds." 11 

Wesley A Riddle, Professor of History at West Point, said: "If some do not 
recognize their impeding slavery, it is because the tyrant who steals our freedoms 
is subtle, multifaceted, sometimes benevolent, and wears the mask of a smiling 
bureaucrat and government social worker, who has your supposed best interest in 
mind.... The liberty we have gotten is not the ordered sort the Founders intended. It 
serves no purpose nor ends but our own destruction. We witness now the onset of 
social chaos sanctioned by government, without the consent of the people to do 
it." This officer concluded by saying the Constitution may have been "circum- 
vented" to serve the elites, and we are heading towards "national suicide."" 

In 1957 Senator George W. Malone spoke in Congress about the illegal 
Federal Reserve: "I believe that if the people of this nation fully understood what 
Congress has done to them over the past 49 years, they would move on Washing- 
ton, they would not wait for an election. ...It adds up to a preconceived plan to 
destroy the economic and social interdependence of the U.S." Charles A. Reich, in 
Opposing the System, said the present system cannot continue much longer and 
protests and demonstrations are probably coming as the large corporations increas- 
ingly destroy our heritage. 14 I agree with Reich that these protests should "unite 
rather than divide" to succeed. This is partly why I feel the left and right must 
unite to stop the large corporations. 

In 1861 President Lincoln told Father Chiniquy that he was aware of the 
secret power of financial interests that were dedicated to overthrowing the govern- 
ment and if the people ever awoke to the evil intents of these people "the revul- 
sion would be comparable to that which swept France" during its revolution." On 
November 21, 1864 Lincoln wrote William Elkin suiting: "I see in the near future 
a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of 
my country. ...Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high 
places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong 
its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggre- 
gated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more 
anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before even in the midst of war." 

Gary Phillips has spent his career in the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization 
Service (INS). This head of the Seattle INS discovered that the Sixteenth Amend- 
ment was never properly ratified, so he has refused to pay income taxes since 
1993. Phillips said: "What I see going on in this country scares me to death, it 
makes pre-revolution France look like Sunday School. If it boils over, anybody in 



264 Treason The New World Order 



government will be seen as the enemy and punishment will come at the hands of 
the mob." 

Time and again throughout history the ruling class has wanted one thing — to 
own and control everything and everyone. The ruling elite look on the American 
people with utter contempt and arrogance, so they do not understand how 
widespread and deep is the people's anger at the growing federal tyranny. If the 
right to bear arms is suddenly removed, the dictatorship would be at hand, and the 
people have a right to defend themselves against tyranny. It is absolutely essential 
that the people not be disarmed. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are sacred 
documents that above all else must be protected. 

While I feel people should understand how volatile things now are, I am not 
calling for violence. I have reached many conclusions about our present predica- 
ment with some sadness, believing that all life is precious and recognizing the 
failure of our political system. I prefer that a new political party develop, that 
enough people awaken in time, so the Constitution can be restored through the 
normal political process; but that may no longer be possible. Courts rarely respect 
the Constitution and our legal system has become an organ of corporate power 
that only the rich can afford. There is rampant vote fraud and the large corporations 
control the press, Congress, and the executive branch. 

Throughout this book I have made numerous suggestions that people can 
follow. It may be wise in the tradition of the civil rights movement and anti-war 
protests to have huge marches on Washington, D.C. and other cities to demand in 
a nonviolent manner that the Constitution be followed and that government be re- 
turned to the people. About 22 states have now approved term limits." Removing 
the grip of professional politicians, lobbyists, and cash from dominating politics 
is essential. There must be campaign finance reform and term limits, but no 
constitutional convention, for all politicians, as well as more use of the initiative, 
referendum, and recall of public officials. There should also be national elections 
to decide key issues, as is done in some states and in Switzerland. Direct voting 
gives the people a more direct say in government. Also, elections should take 
place on weekends as in many countries. 

Many issues discussed in this book relate to the potential rise of a third party. 
One poll described Americans as "a disbelieving electorate almost out of patience." 
However, third parties are suppressed through harassment and manipulation of the 
election laws. Economic issues are important, but the continued loss of our rights 
and spiritual values will be the basis for a third party movement in America. Get 
involved with the Patriot movement and a third party such as the Libertarian 
Party, especially if it aggressively works to restore the Constitution. In a third 
party there is the nucleus for a revitalized America to restore the principles of 
constitutional government. Candidates like Charles Collins will increasingly step 
forward and be supported by the people. Attacking the Federal Reserve and 
supporting a return to constitutional government, Collins was forced out of the 
Republican party in a manner that would warm the heart of any fascist. 

In 1994, 62 percent of the electorate didn't vote. If the people are given more 
political power, they will become more involved in politics. What the country 
needs is a new populist party to restore the Constitution and end corporate influ- 
ence. Millions of people are ready for this. A Patriot-Christian populist coalition 
could dismantle the federal government while protecting constitutional rights and 
Christian values. Global capitalism should be replaced by restoring Jeffersonian 



Restoring Constitutional Government 265 



democracy. The Christian right is increasingly disgusted with the Republican party 
which takes them for granted. 

Workers and minority groups should abandon the Democratic party, as it has 
abandoned them. The Democratic party is desperately clinging to the New Deal, 
constantly calling Republican plans to shrink government right wing extremism, 
while proclaiming that it also wants less government. Clinton has taken up the 
Republican call for less government so he can increase government power. As the 
Democratic party becomes increasingly irrelevant to the issues of our time, it 
lashes out at what it does not understand. While many of the newly elected 
Republicans are a hope, the party is still controlled by Wall Street as we saw in 
NAFTA, GATT, and the Mexican loan, so it remains to be seen if these new 
members can make a difference. James Mill warned: "The benefits of the represen- 
tative system are lost, in all cases, in which the interests of the choosing body are 
not the same with those of the community." 

During the 1992 presidential campaign the key phrase used by Clinton's team 
was "It's the economy stupid." The economy has improved, yet Clinton and 
Congress have earned little respect. Clinton and the political pundits don't under- 
stand why this is so. Just after the 1994 elections I read a remarkably distorted 
essay by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. in the Wall Street Journal." He acknowledged 
that people were very angry but didn't understand why because the economy was 
doing well. The anti-government bias of the people was acknowledged, and 
Schlesinger called it "ideological anti-government extremism." That the federal 
government now has far more power than was ever envisioned by the Founders and 
far more power than they warned could safely be used, is ignored by the more 
government is better crowd. This is the extremism of the Washington elite that 
must end to restore constitutional government. The arrogance politicians have 
towards the people has helped create the anger and contempt many feel towards 
Washington. Now we increasingly have rights that the state defines and allows; we 
no longer are born with God given rights such as "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of 
Happiness" as described in the Declaration of Independence. 

The politicians and pundits define American happiness in terms of economics, 
not in terms of freedom or moral values. Since the 1994 elections, I have heard 
numerous experts speak on the results. The concern about lost rights is never even 
raised in the myriad opinion polls. The most the experts can acknowledge is that 
many feel the federal government has too much power, but what this means is 
rarely discussed. What difference does it make if we earn $5.00 or $5,000 an hour 
if we lose all our liberties. If the Democratic/Republican party starts dismantling 
the federal government but refuses to remove the many laws violating the people's 
rights, both parties will be devastated in the coming years as happened recently in 
Canada and Italy. 

In 1992 the public turned against the Republican party because it was very 
angry with politicians and wanted change. With little change and wanting less 
government in 1994 the people voted for the Republicans in large numbers. By 
1996 little has changed, and this is deepening the people's anger and disillusion- 
ment. Tom Foley, a member of the CFR, was replaced as House speaker by CFR 
member Newt Gingrich. As long as the Democratic/Republican party controls 
Congress, different faces will make similar false promises and nothing will 
change. We have one national political party with two branches controlled by and 
representing the banks and big business. As Quigley said in Tragedy and Hope, 



266 Treason The New World Order 



even in the last century the business interests acted to control both political parties 
creating false debates to fool the public and conceal their influence." 

Ultimately the people will start voting in large numbers for third party 
candidates. Even Newt Gingrich agreed with this possibility just after the 1994 
elections. Then a poll showed that 60 percent of the people voted to reject the 
Democratic party and only 18 percent felt the vote was a Republican mandate. At 
best the 1994 election was a qualified two year mandate for the Republicans. In the 
fall of 1994 a poll showed that six out of 10 Americans wanted to change our 
entire system of government. According to a poll by the University of Michigan, 
trust in government has gone from about 80 percent in 1964 to under 20 percent 
by 1994. 

Already many political pundits have declared the Republican revolution a 
failure. Few government agencies have been closed and corporate welfare has 
barely been touched. The special interests remain in control and term limits re- 
mains a distant goal." Even the budget cuts only refer to culling the degree of 
growth not reversing and limiting federal spending. 

A major reason why people are so angry is that "It's the Constitution stupid." 
Millions of Americans are witnessing their rights being lost, but the politicians 
are too cut off from the people to acknowledge or even understand this concern, 
and the corporate media is too busy telling us about the latest crime or sports 
event. When is the last time the politicians or media discussed how little value the 
Constitution has in our lives today? That our freedoms are being lost is never even 
discussed. Instead we hear that constitutional protections may have to be sacrificed 
because of crime and terrorism. 

We are ruled by professional politicians who want money and power. There is 
no sense of integrity, ethics, or spirituality in government. Our representatives no 
longer respect or represent the people and our constitutional heritage. The success- 
ful politician of the future will loudly proclaim how the Constitution has been 
seriously weakened and that constitutional government must be restored. However, 
the people must watch what is actually done not just what is said. 

Instead of just attacking the government to bring about needed reforms, we 
should restore government to its proper role by pulling it under the constraints of 
the Constitution. Constitutional government is good government. In addition, it 
is an illusion to think that just by reducing government there will be more 
individual freedoms, because the real problem comes primarily from the large cor- 
porations not from big government. The result of the corporate take-over of our 
country in the 20th century has been five major wars, a crippling national debt 
where before there was none, crippling taxes where before there were few, loss of 
constitutional rule, a huge prison population, and creation of a vast bureaucracy. 
Even if Clinton were indicted and removed from office, as many want, little would 
change. The power of the secret government would remain intact, because the large 
corporations would just put into place another agent. Our entire political system 
has been corrupted and removing one or many dishonest politicians is no longer 
sufficient. Corporate control of the federal government must end. 

There is a growing call for a spiritual transformation of public service. Jim 
Wallis said, in The Soul of Politics: "Deep in the American soul exists the con- 
viction that politics and morality are integrally related." There needs to be a 
"politics of conscience." Michael Lerner, in Jewish Renewal, called for a return to 
compassion and moral integrity to restore morality to public life. Stephen Carter, 



Restoring Constitutional Government 267 



in The Culture of Disbelief, argued that spiritual values must again become part of 
the debate as to what type of society we want America to be. 20 We need to under- 
stand, as individuals and as a society, that the corporate wish for more and more 
material wealth leads to an emptiness of the soul. We must stop thinking that 
economic growth will solve all our problems. When personal happiness is so 
centered around material wealth, a spiritual crisis and immorality is inevitable. 
George Washington said at the end of his presidency: "Of all the dispositions and 
habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable 
supports. ...Honesty is always the best policy." Thomas Jefferson said: "The whole 
of government consists in the art of being honest." Ethics and moral values must 
be restored to public service. 

More people should turn to God to make wise and compassionate choices in 
life. If everyone were more directly experiencing God's love, there would be much 
less suffering and far fewer problems in the world. One way to reestablish consti- 
tutional government in America is to with pure intentions and from your heart and 
higher self to send light and love to the bankers, industrialists, politicians, rogue 
elements in the intelligence and military community and others that would destroy 
this Republic that they may move closer to the Divine. Love is the greatest power 
in the universe. If thousands of people are sending light and love to these groups, 
this will have a strong effect on them. Light, love, and force of arms only as a last 
resort, should be directed towards those promoting the new world order. As Jesus 
taught this is a higher path. People have a right to defend their freedoms with arms 
if necessary, but unless the government openly tries to remove guns from the 
people or uses some excuse to declare martial law, people should get more 
involved in the political system and also focus on educating more people to our 
present predicament. The militias should stand ready but not initiate armed action. 

One should also understand that such positive spiritual actions while helpful 
may not be enough. Some would say that it is being negative to discuss what has 
been written in this book. There are times in life when direct actions are necessary 
to protect one's rights and freedoms. If people had sat back and said that God would 
remove Hitler or Stalin, the world would be a much worse place today. Positive 
spiritual reflection is always appropriate, but in this world it isn't always enough, 
especially when events have reached an advanced stage. We as citizens have a 
responsibility to ourselves, to society, and to future generations to restore the 
rights and freedoms which the Founders fought so hard to establish. 

Shortly before his death, Anthony Sherman described a vision that George 
Washington had at Valley Forge. He was visited by an angel and told that "while 
the stars remain and the heavens send down dew upon the earth, so long shall the 
Republic last. The whole world united shall never be able to prevail against her. 
Let every child of the Republic learn to live for his God, his land and the Union." 
Washington was shown three great dangers to Americas survival. The first was the 
Revolutionary War, the second was the Civil War, and the third concerned an event 
that has not yet occurred.' 

If constitutional government was restored, the nation would then face the third 
great danger described in Washington's vision. The European elites would see 
America as the great threat to establishing a one world government, so they would 
scheme to attack the U.S. Washington saw vast armies from Europe, Asia, and 
Africa attacking America with great devastation resulting. The angelic being re- 
portedly said: "Son of the Republic, what you have seen is thus interpreted. Three 



268 Treason The New World Order 



great perils will come upon the Republic. The most fearful is the third...."" For 
constitutional government to be safely restored in America, the world center of the 
secret government, the one square mile city of London and its back up centers in 
Switzerland and Italy, must also be captured. Perhaps if the U.S. military inter- 
venes it will be done in conjunction with patriots in other countries! 

Historians state that one to three percent of the population fought the British 
in the Revolutionary War. By the 1930s the repression from Washington had 
gotten far worse than what our ancestors faced, and today, far more than three 
percent of the U.S. population understands this. While scholars like Leonard W. 
Levy have convincingly demonstrated that in the early years of the Republic there 
was little emphasis on following the teachings of the Founders, if constitutional 
government is to be restored today it is essential that we return to the vision of 
Founders for guidance. Government must again be tied to the chains of the Con- 
stitution. 

Many in power, such as congressmen and judges, should not wait until the 
last minute to start supporting the Constitution. As the federal government in- 
creases its power and abuses the people and the Constitution and more people 
understand that increasingly the choice is to support the Constitution and the rule 
of law or to commit treason. As the corporate onslaught continues to destroy our 
constitutional heritage and way of life we are approaching the situation that 
Ulysses S. Grant described in 1861, at the start of the Civil War. Then he said: 
"There are but two parties now, traitors and patriots." 

I believe enough people will awaken in time to prevent the new world order 
police state, and that we as a people can continue moving closer to God's love and 
grace. The human race has today reached a critical turning point. We as a people 
will soon undergo great advancement in our spiritual evolution, or there will be a 
sharp collapse in consciousness. I pray that God's grace will continue to shine on 
our country and that the vision of freedom and morality that the Founding Fathers 
so sacrificed for will once again be restored to America. What is ultimately at 
stake here is whether America, and indeed the entire planet, will continue under a 
hierarchical society, where the few rule the many, or we can exist under Divine 
law in a truly democratic Republic where we are all equal before God. 



269 



Notes 



Chapter I Introduction 

1 See U.S. News &World Report, June 13, 1994, p. 32. 

2 Robert A. Heinlein, Take Back Your Government (N.Y: Simon & Schuster, 
1992), p. 249. 

3 Joe Urschel, "Sentiments Not Held Only by the Fringe," USA Today, May 16, 
1995, p. Al, A2. 

4 "State of Seige," Newsweek, September 18, 1995, p. 21. 

5 David M. Kotz, Bank Control of Large Corporations in the United States 
(Berkeley, University of Cal. Press, 1978). 

6 David Heilbroner, "The Law Goes on a Treasure Hunt," New York Times 
Magazine, Section 6, December 11, 1994, p. 73. 

Chapter II Freedom is Being Lost 

1 David P. Szatinary, Shays Rebellion: The Making of An Agrarian Insurrection 
(Amherst: The University of Mass., 1980), p. 120. 

2 Jerry Fresia, Toward An American Revolution (Boston: South End Press, 1988), 
p. 33-43. 

3 Wesley A. Riddle, "Secession and the Moral Compact," Vital Speeches, August 
1, 1995, p. 638. 

4 Noam Chomsky, Deterring Democracy (N.Y: Verso, 1991), p. 365. 

5 Ibid., p. 369-370. 

6 Gerry Spence, From Freedom to Slavery (N.Y: St. Martin's Press, 1993), p. 5- 
6, 11. 

7 Ibid., p. 77, 104. 

8 Ibid., p. 86, 149. 

9 William Greider, Who Will Tell the People (N.Y: Simon & Schuster, 1992), p. 
11-12, 61,241. 

10 Ferdinand Lundberg, Myth of Democracy (N.Y: Carol Publishing Group, 
1989), p. 88. 

11 Lewis H. Lapham, The Wish For Kings (N.Y: Grove Press, 1993), 
p. 27-28. 

12 Ibid., p. 178. 

13 Gore Vidal, The Decline and Fall of the American Empire (Berkeley, Ca: 
Odonian Press, 1986-1992), p. 59. 

14 Michael Novak, "Democracy, Capitalism and Morality," Wall Street Journal, 
December 27, 1994, p. A16. 

Chapter III The Secret Government 

1 C.B. Dall, FDR, My Exploited Father-in-Law (Tulsa, Ok: Christian Crusade 
Publications, 1968), p. 69, 92, 108, 137, 185. 

2 Elliott Roosevelt, The Conservators (N.Y: Arbor House, 1983), p. 320. 

3 George Seldes, 1000 Americans (N.Y: Boni & Gaer, 1947), p. 176. 

4 Robert J. Groden and Harrison E. Livingtone, High Treason (Boothwyn, Pa: 
The Conservatory Press, 1989), p. 350-1. 



270 Treason The New World order 



5 To order a fascinating interview Quigley gave to a Washington Post reporter in 
1974 send $13.30 to: Stanley Monteith P.O. Box 1835 Soquel, Ca. 95073. 

6 Dall, op. cit., Note 1, p. 92. 

7 I Timothy 6:10 Bible. 

8 Gary Allen, None Dare Call ft Conspiracy (Seal Beach, Ca: Concord Press, 
1971), p. 89; John A. Stormer, None Dare Call It Treason (Florissant, Mo: 

Liberty Bell Press, 1964), p. 211-2. 

9 Richard Harwood, "Ruling Class Journalists," Washington Post, October 30, 
1993, p. A21. 

10 Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (N.Y: The MacMillian Co., 1966), p. 950. 

11 Ibid., p. 324, 337. 

12 Elliott Roosevelt, cd., F.D.R. His Personal Letters 1928-1945, Vol. I (N.Y: 
Duell, Sloan & Pearce, 1950), p. 371-373. 

13 Phyllis Schlafly and Chester Ward, Kissinger on the Couch (New Rochelle, 
N.Y: Arlington House, 1975), p. 151. 

14 Frank Smyth, "My Spy Story," Wall Street Journal, February 22, 1996, p. 
A19. 

15 Schlafly, op. cit., Note 13, p. 146, 149-150. 

16 "How the FBI's Criminal-Espionage Investigation of the CFR Was Foiled," 
(Wichita, Ks: Sunset Research, 1994). 

17 Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages (N.Y: The Viking Press, 1970), p. 
72, 134. 

18 David Rockefeller, "From a China Traveler," New York Times, August 10, 
1973, p. 31. 

19 Michel J. Crozier, Samuel P. Huntington, and Joji Watanuki, The Crisis of 
Democracy (N.Y: The Trilateral Commission, 1975), p. 102, 162, 173. 

20 Stephen Gill, American Hegemony and the 'Trilateral Commission (Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press, 1990), p. 129. 

21 Cord Meyer, Jr., Peace or Anarchy (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1948), p. 
67-68. 

22 For a good list of members of these groups in the federal government send 
$1.00 to F.R.E.E. P.O. Box 33339 Kerrville, Tx. 78028. They get their 
information partly from checking the directors and executives in Standard & Poors 
Register of public corporations and from annual reports published by CFR. These 
groups are quite confident so they rarely hide the names of their members although 
their meetings are usually conducted in secret. 

23 George C. Edwards and Wallace E. Walker, eds., National Security and the 
U.S. Constitution (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1988), p. 24. 

24 "Hylan Takes Stand on National Issues," New York Times, March 27, 1922, 
p. 3. 

25 U.S., Congress, Senate, Congressional Record, February 23, 1954 Vol. 100 
Part 2, p. S 2121. 

26 U.S. Congress, House, Special House Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt 
Foundations, Recce Committee 1954, p. 176-7. 

27 Rene A. Wormser, Foundations: Their Power and Influence (N.Y: Devin-Adair 
Co., 1958). p. 317-327. 

28 Barry Goldwater, With No Apologies (N.Y: William Morrow and Co., 1979), 
p. 128. 

29 Ibid., p. 280, 284, 285. 



Notes 271 



30 R. Buckminster Fuller, Critical Path (N.Y: St. Martin's Press, 1981), p. 117- 
119. 

31 Dall, op. cit., Note 1, p. 85-86. 

32 Christopher Lydon, "Jimmy Carter Revealed," Atlantic Monthly, 240 (July, 
1977), 50-7; Jeremiah Novak, "The Trilateral Connection," Atlantic Monthly, 240 
(July, 1977), 57-9. 

33 Goldwater, op. cit., Note 28, p. 293. 

34 See the February 24, March 23, and May 4, 1992 columns by Alexander 
Cockburn in The Nation. 

35 Joseph Kraft, "School For Statesmen," Harpers Magazine, 217 (July, 1958), 
68. 

36 Antony C. Sutton, America's Secret Establishment (Billings, Mt: Liberty 
House Press, 1986). 

Chapter IV New World Order 

1 Alfred M. Lilienthal, "Which Way to World Government?" Foreign Policy 
Association Headline Series, Number 83 (September-October, 1950), p. 43. 

2 George W. Blount, Peace Through World Government (Durham, N.C: Moore 
Publishing Co., 1974). 

3 Jean Drissell, "A Senator's View of World Order," Transition, III (April, 1976). 

4 Arnold Toynbee, Experiences (N.Y: Oxford University Press, 1969), p. 110. 

5 Takashi Oka, "A Crowded World: Can Mankind Survive," Christian Science 
Monitor, February 10, 1975, p. 5-6. 

6 Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider, The First Global Revolution A Report 
By the Council of the Club of Rome (N.Y: Pantheon Books, 1991), p. 110-115. 

7 Lincoln P. Bloomfield, "International Force in a Disarming-Bui Revolutionary- 
World," International Organization, XVII (Spring, 1963), 444-64; Graham T. 
Allison, Joseph S. Nye, Jr., and Albert Carnesale, eds., Fateful Visions 
(Cambridge, Ma: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1988), p. 211. 

8 Ibid., p. 212. 

9 Richard Falk, "A New Paradigm for International Legal Studies: Prospects and 
Proposals," Yale Law Journal, 84 (April, 1975), 969-1021; Richard Falk, A Study 
of Future Worlds (N.Y: The Free Press, 1975). 

10 U.S., Congress, Senate, Subcommittee on Foreign Relations, Revision of the 
U.N. Charter, Hearings, 81st Cong., 2d Session. February 17, 1950. (Washing- 
ton, D.C: Government Printing Office, 1950), p. 494. 

11 James Warburg, The West in Crisis (Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday & Co., 
1959), p. 30. 

12 Gary Allen, Say No To the New World Order (Seal Beach, Ca: Concord Press, 
1987), p. 59-61. 

13 Philip Kerr, "From Empire to Commonwealth," Foreign Affairs, I (December 
15, 1922), 97-98. 

14 John Foster Dulles, War or Peace (N.Y: The Macmillan Co., 1950), p. 40. 

15 H.G. Wells, "Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific 
Progress Upon Human Life and Thought" (N.Y: Harper and Brothers, 1901), p. 
322-325. 

16 Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (N.Y: Simon & Schuster, 
1953), p. 103-105. These words appeared in the 1953 edition of this book. 



272 Treason The New World order 



17 Julian Huxley, UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy (Washington, D.C: 
Public Affairs Press, 1947), p. 13, 15,21. 

18 Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich, Population, Resources, Environment: 
Issues on Human Ecology (San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Co., 1970), p. 204. 

19 Paul Ehrlich, The Population Bomb (N.Y: Ballantine, 1978), p. 17. 

20 Peter Beinart, "Aid and Abet," New Republic, October 30, 1995, p. 23-25. 

21 Michael S. Teitelbaum, "The Population Threat," Foreign Affairs, 71 (Winter 
1992/1993), 63-78. 

22 Bahgat Elnadi and Adel Rifaat, "Interview Jacques-Yves Cousteau," The Unesco 
Courier, (November, 1991), 8-13. 

23 Robert Lederer, "Chemical-Biological Warfare, Medical Experiments, and 
Population Control," Covert Action, Number 28 (Summer, 1987), 33-42. 

24 Warren Bennis and Philip Slater, The Temporary Society (N.Y: Harper & 
Row, Publishers, 1968), p. 44-45. 

25 G.B. Chisholm, "The Reestablishment of Peacetime Society," Psychiatry, IX 
(February, 1946), p. 7, 9. 

26 Garrett Hardin, "Parenthood: Right or Privilege?" Science, June 31, 1970, p. 
427. 

27 Edgar R. Chasteen, The Case for Compulsive Birth Control (Englewood 
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1971), p. 79, 204. 

28 Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, "Slime Green," The Progressive, 60 
(May, 1996), 18-21. 

29 Laurance Rockefeller, "The Case for a Simpler Life-Style," The Reader's 
Digest, 108 (February, 1976), 61-65. 

30 Barbara Marx Hubbard, "The Book of Co-Creation: The Revelation Alternative 
to Armageddon", Part III Manuscript 1980, p. 59-61. 

31 Joyce Nelson, "Burson-Marsteller, Pax Trilateral, and the Brundtland Gang vs. 
the Environment," Covert Action, Number 44 (Spring, 1993), 26-33, 57-58. 

32 Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages (N.Y: The Viking Press, 1970), p. 
10, 16. 

33 "American Malvern," Time, March 16, 1942, p. 44, 46-48. 

34 Edgar C. Bundy, Collectivism in the Churches (Wheaton III: The Church 
League of America, 1958), p. 174-7. 

35 U.S., Congress, House, Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on 
International Operations, U.S. Policy in the UN, 99 Congress 1st Sess. December 
4, 1985. (Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 1985), p. 152-157. 

36 Strobe Talbott, "The Birth of the Global Nation," Time, July 20, 1992, p. 70- 
71. 

37 Ross Smyth, "Towards Global Governance," The Rotarian, 165 (November, 
1994), 67. 

38 "New World Order: Consensus," Cape Code Times, January 28, 1993. 

39 Mark Riebling, Wedge The Secret War Between the FBI and CIA (N.Y: Alfred 
A. Knopf, 1994), p. 407-409. 

40 G.K. Chesterton, "Wells and the World State," in The Collected Works of 
G.K. Chesterton, ed. by Robert Royal (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986), p. 
215-216. 

41 Testimony before the Trade Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means 
Committee, February 2, 1994. 



Notes 273 



42 Malachi Martin, The Keys of this Blood (N.Y: Simon & Schuster, 1990), p. 
16. 

43 Best Studios has produced 3 videos on this report. P.O. Box 69 Wheeler, Wi. 
54772(1-800-257-2672). 

44 Leonard C. Lewin, Report From Iron Mountain on the Possibility and 
Desirability ofPeace (N.Y: The Dial Press, Inc., 1967), p. 73. 

45 Zbigniew Brzezinski, "America in the Technetronic Age," Encounter, XXX 
(January, 1968), 16-26. 

46 George Bernard Shaw, The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and 
Capitalism (N.Y: Brentano's Publishers, 1928), p. 53. 

47 Barry Goldwater, With No Apologies (N.Y: William Morrow and Co., 1979), 
p. 278. 

48 Frank Kofsky, Harry S. Truman and the War Scare of 1948 (N.Y: St. Martin's 
Press, 1993), p. 308. 

49 Michael Parenti, Inventing Reality (N.Y: St. Martin's Press, 1986), p. 240- 
241. 

50 "Viewpoint," U.S. News & World Report, May 20, 1996, p. 22. 

Chapter V Fooling the People 

1 Rodney Stich, Defrauding America (Alamo, Ca: Diablo Western Press, Inc., 
1993), p. 517. 

2 Carl Bernstein, "The CIA and the Media," Rolling Stone, Number 250 October 
20, 1977, p. 25. 

3 Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "Reforming the CIA?" Unclassified, VI (June-August, 
1994), 6-8. 

4 Thomas Kuhn, Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of 
Chicago Press, 1970), p. 92. 

5 Ray Moseley, "West's Fear of Islam Overblown," San Francisco Examiner, 
February 19, 1995, p. A33. 

6 C.B. Dall, FDR, My Exploited Father-in-Law (Tulsa, Ok: Christian Crusade 
Publications, 1968), p. 22-23, 109, 140-141. 

7 A K. Chesterton, The New Unhappy Lords (London: The Candour Publishing 
Co., 1965), p. 36. 

8 John Sullivan, "In Considering Electronic Voting, Giuliani Faces the Fraud 
Factor," New York Times, August 26, 1995, p. All; "Voting Early and Often," 
Wall Street Journal, December 19, 1994, p. A14. 

9 Ivars Peterson, "Making Votes Count," Science News, October 30, 1993, p. 
282. 

10 Jonathan Vankin, Conspiracies Cover-Ups and Crimes (N.Y: Dell Publishing, 
1995), p. 22-38. 

11 "What National Emergency?" The Los Angeles Daily Journal, September 27, 
1995, p. 4. 

12 Eugene Schroder, Constitution Fact or Fiction (Cleburne, Texas: Buffalo Creek 
Press, 1995). 

13 Ruth Marcus, "President Says He Shares the Blame for Defeats," Washington 
Post, November 10, 1994, p. Al. 

14 James W. Loewen, Lies My Teacher Told Me (N.Y: The New Press, 1995), p. 
267. 



274 Treason The New World order 



15 Mark I. Schwartz, "What Multiculturalism Did to Canada," Wall Street 
Journal, April 5, 1996, p. A9. 

16 Ralph Keyes, "Did They Really Say It," Parade Magazine, May 16, 1993, p. 
10. 

17 Lewis Copeland and Lawrence W. Lamin, eds., The World's Greatest Speeches 
(N.Y: Dover Publications, Inc., 1973), p. 232-234. 

18 Catherine Millard, The Rewriting of America's History (Camp Hill, Pa: 
Horizon House Publishers, 1991), p. 229, 240, 247, 258-263. 

19 Elizabeth Gleick, "She Spoke Volumes," Time, September 25, 1995, p. 52. 

20 Henry Glassie, Passing the Time in Ballymenone: Culture and History of an 
Ulster Community (Philadelphia: U. of Pennsylvania Press, 1982), p. 652. 

21 Don Doig, "The Independent Jury's Secret Veto Power," Media Bypass, II 
(December, 1994), 25-29. 

22 For further information 1-800-835-5879 JIFA P.O. Box 59 Helmville, Mt. 
59843. Joining this organization is an excellent way to protect the people's rights. 

23 Wade Lambert, "Militias Are Joining Jury-Power Activists To Fight 
Government," Wall Street Journal, May 25, 1995, p. Al, A8. 

24 James Ledbetter, "Press Clips," Village Voice, June 13, 1995, p. A9. 

25 Mort Rosenblum, "Hidden Agendas," Vanity Fair, 53 (March, 1990), 120. 

26 Ron Harris, "Experts Say the War on Drugs Has Turned Into a War on Blacks," 
San Francisco Chronicle, April 24, 1990, p. A 12. 

27 Arnold C. Brackman, The Other Nuremberg: The Untold Story of the Tokyo 
War Crimes Trials (N.Y: William Morrow and Co., 1987), p. 190-195. 

28 Dall, op. cit., Note 6, p. 59. 

29 David Boren, "The World Needs An Army on Call," New York Times, August 
26, 1992, p. A21; Ronnie Dugger, "Create a World Army," New York Times, 
June 27, 1995, p. A15; Warren Getler, "Uncle Sam Should Strengthen U.N., Not 
Boss It," Wall Street Journal, August 20, 1992, p. A9. 

30 Gerald B. Helman and Steven R. Ratner, "Saving Failed States," Foreign 
Policy, 89 (Winter, 1992-1993), 3-21. 

31 Strobe Talbolt, "Dealing With Anti-Countries," Time, December 14, 1992, p. 
35. 

32 Duncan Hunter, "Bosnia Becomes Anthony Lake's Laboratory," Washington 
Times National Weekly, February 12-18, 1996, p. 34. 

33 Stephen D. Goose and Frank Smyth, "Arming Genocide in Rwanda," Foreign 
Affairs, 73 (September/October, 1994), 86-96. 

34 Jon Stewart, "New Ways to Pay the U.N. Piper," San Francisco Chronicle, 
May 7, 1995, p. 6. 

35 David A. Andelman, "The Drug Money Maze," Foreign Affairs, 73 
(July/August, 1994), 94-108. 

36 "Radiation Victims Protest Biased Investigation," The Progressive, 58 
(December, 1994), 14. 

37 Robin Rauzi, "Victims Lawyer Wants Scientist Punished for Radiation Tests," 
Albuquerque Tribune, December. 15, 1994, p. A6. 

38 Glenn Alcalay, "Damage Control on Human Radiation Experiments," Covert 
Action, Number 52 (Spring, 1995), 46-47. 

39 Edward S. Corwin, Presidential Power and the Constitution (Ithaca, N.Y: 
Cornel University Press, 1976), p. 143. 



Notes 275 



40 William Minter and Laurence H. Shoup, Imperial Brain Trust: The Council on 
Foreign Relations and United States Foreign Policy (N.Y: Monthly Review Press, 
1977). p. 24-27. 

41 Murray N. Rothbard, America's Great Depression (Kansas City: Sheed and 
Ward, Inc., 1972). 

42 Gary Allen, None Dare Call It Conspiracy (Seal Beach, Ca: Concord Press, 
1971), p. 54. 

43 Ibid., p. 43-5. 

44 C.B. Dall, FDR, My Exploited Father-in-law (Tulsa, Ok: Christian Crusade 
Publications, 1968), p. 49, 119-120. 

45 Ibid., p. 59. 

46 Walter Karp, Indispensable Enemies (N.Y: Saturday Review Press, 1973), p. 
110-111, 128. 

47 Howard Zinn, The Politics of History (Boston: Beacon Press, 1970), p. 118- 
136. 

48 Barton Bernstein, "The New Deal: The Conservative Achievements of Liberal 
Reform," in Towards A New Past Dissenting Essays in American History, ed. by 
Barton Bernstein (N. Y: Pantheon Books, 1968), p. 263-288. 

49 James Petras and Steve Vieux, "The New Shape of the Imperial State," Z 
Magazine, VIII (September, 1995), 43-50. 

50 Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., "In Defense of Government," Wall Street Journal, June 
7, 1995, p. A14. 

51 Ruth Simon, "How Washington Could Tip the Scales Against Investors," 
Money, XXIV (October, 1995), p. 122-124, 127-128; Jeffrey Taylor, "Congress 
Sends Business a Christmas Gift," Wall Street Journal, December 26, 1995, p. 
A2. 

52 John J. Dilulio, Jr. and Donald F. Kettl, "Fine Print," (Washington, D.C: The 
Brookings Institution, 1995), p. 60. 

53 William M. Bulkeley, "Get Ready for Smart Cards in Health Care," The Wall 
Street Journal, May 3, 1993, p. Bll. 

54 James M. Burns, "The Power to Lead," in Reforming American Government, 
editor Donald L. Robinson, (Boulder, Co: Westview Press, 1985), p. 160. 

55 Michael S. Paulsen, "The Case for a Constitutional Convention," Wall Street 
Journal, May 3, 1995, p. A15. 

56 Dirk Johnson, "Conspiracy Theories' Impact Reverberates in Legislatures," 
New York Times, July 6, 1995, p. Al, A12. 

Chapter VI State Rights and the Federal Government 

1 Joyce Rosenwald, "Conceived in Liberty," Media Bypass, III (July, 1995), 50- 
51. 

2 Pickney G. McElwee, "The 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United 
States and the Threat That It Poses to Our Democratic Government," South 
Carolina Quarterly, Vol II (1959), 484-519. 

3 James J Kilpatrick, The Sovereign States (Chicago: Henry Regnery Co., 1957), 
p. 47. 

4 David Robertson, Debates and Other Proceedings of the Convention of Virginia 
(Richmond, 1805), p. 27. 

5 Ibid., p. 32. 



276 Treason The New World order 



6 From a letter to Joseph C. Cabell, February 2, 1816, The Writings of Thomas 
Jefferson (Washington, D.C: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1905), 
Vol. 14, p. 421. 

7 Alfred Adask, "Fed Fear," AntiShyster, V (Spring, 1995), 6. 

8 Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of A Conservative (Shepherdsville, Ky: Victor 
Publishing Co., Inc., 1960), p. 16. 

9 Ibid., p. 21-22. 

10 Daniel Yankelovich, Coming to Public Judgment (Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse 
University Press, 1991). 

11 David Schoenbrod, "It's Time Congress Took Back Its Power to Make Laws," 
Wall Street Journal, December 6, 1995, p. A21. 

12 Michael Shanahan and Miles Benson, "Pork Losing Some Sheen for Voters," 
San Francisco Examiner, October 23, 1994, p. A2. 

13 Jonathan Rauch, Demosclerosis (N.Y: Random House, 1994), p. 164. 

14 Stephen Moore, "The Unconstitutional Congress," Policy Review, (Spring, 
1995), p. 25. 

15 Kevin Fedarko, "A Gun Ban is Shot Down," Time, May 8, 1995, p. 85. 

16 Moore, op. cit., Note 14, p. 22-27. 

17 William F. Weld, "Release Us From Federal Nonsense," Wall Street Journal, 
December 11, 1995, p. A14; Paul C. Roberts, "Welfare: Maybe the States Can 
Figure Out What Works," Business Week, December 4, 1995, p. 21. 

18 Bruce Babbitt, "States Rights for Liberals," The New Republic, January 24, 
1981, p. 21-23. 

19 Tom Bethell, "Fix Washington Before It Enslaves Us All," Wall Street 
Journal, December 2, 1994, p. A12. 

20 Paul Roberts, "America's Secessionist Boom The Goodbye Whirl," The New 
Republic, November 21, 1994, p. 11-12. 

21 Warren Cohen, David Hage, and Robert F. Black, "Reversing the Tide," U.S. 
News & World Report, April 3, 1995, p. 42-47, 49; Robert W. Poole Jr., "The 
Asset Test: A Privatization Agenda," Reason, IX (February, 1995), 34-36. 

22 David R. Henderson, "The Case For Small Government," Fortune, June 26, 
1995, p. 39-40. 

23 Rauch, op. cit., Note 13, p. 142. 

24 Wesley A. Riddle, "Secession and the Moral Compact," Vital Speeches, 
August 1, 1995, p. 638. 

25 To learn more contact Ken Bohnsack 1154 West Logan Street Freeport, II. 
61032 (815)-232-8737. 

26 Louis Fisher, "The Curious Belief in Judicial Supremacy," Suffolk University 
Law Review, XXV (Spring, 1991), 85-116. 

27 Pete Du Pont, "Pleading the Tenth," National Review, November 27, 1995, p. 
50-53. 

28 "The Tenth Amendment: A Barrier Against Congress' Grab For Power," 
Judicial Watch, III (Winter, 1995), 1-4. 

29 Thomas Sowell, "Is the Constitution Superfluous?" Forbes, June 5, 1995, p. 
61. 

30 Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Vol. I (N.Y: Vintage Books, 
1990). 

31 Richard A. Epstein, "Self Interest and the Constitution," Journal of Legal 
Education, XXXVII (June, 1987), p. 153-161. 



Notes 277 



Chapter VII Early Signs of Treason 

I "Pacifists Pester Till Mayor Calls The Traitors," New York Times, March 24, 
1917, p. A2; Jennings C. Wise, Woodrow Wilson: Disciple of Revolution (N.Y: 
Paisley Press, 1938), p. 647. 

2 Lt. Colonel J.B. MacLean, "Why Did We Let Trotzky Go?" Maclean's (June, 
1919), p. 34A, 66A, 66B. 

3 U.S., Congress, House, Rep. McFadden Congressional Record, Vol. 77 Part 6 
1st Sess., June 15, 1933, p. 6227. 

4 Antony C. Sutton, Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development 
1917 to 1930, Vol. I (Stanford, Ca: Hoover Institution Publications, 1968), p. 
71-3, 86-91, 290-292. 

5 Michael Ledeen, "A Sellout to China," Wall Street Journal, March 12, 1996, p. 
A18. The Alliance For American Innovation is taking steps to protect U.S. 
Patents-1100 Connecticut Ave., NW #1200 Washington, D.C. 20036-4101. 

6 Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (N.Y: 
The MacMillian Co., 1966), p. 938. 

7 Ibid., 954. 

8 Antony C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution (New Rochelle, 
N.Y: Arlington House Publishers, 1974), p. 176. 

9 Max Eastman, "The Character and Fate of Leon Trotsky," Foreign Affairs 
(January, 1941), 332. 

10 Gabriel Kolko, "American Business and Germany, 1930-1941," The Western 
Political Quarterly, XV (1962), 715. 

II John P. Diggins, Mussolini and Fascism: The View from America (Princeton, 
N.J: Princeton University Press, 1972); Michael Parenti, Inventing Reality (N.Y: 
St. Martin's Press, 1986), p. 115-116. 

12 M.R. Montgomery, "The Press and Adolf Hitler: What the Newspapers Didn't 
See," Boston Globe, January 30, 1983, p. 10-12, 30, 32-37. 

13 Antony C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler (Seal Beach, Ca: '76 
Press, 1976), p. 120-122. 

14 Charles F. Ross, NRA Economic Planning (Indianapolis: The Principia Press, 
1937), p. 37. 

15 U.S., Congress, Senate, Congressional Record, 1933, p. 5165; Committee on 
Finance, National Industrial Recovery, Hearings 73rd Cong., 1st Sess., S. 1712 
and H.R. 5755 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1933), p. 5. 

16 Jules Archer, The Plot To Seize the White House (N.Y: Hawthorn Books, Inc., 
1973), p. 31. 

17 Charles Higham, Trading With the Enemy (N.Y: Delacorte Press, 1983). 

18 Robert Smith, MacArthur in Korea: The Naked Emperor (N.Y: Simon & 
Schuster, 1982), p. 228-235. 

19 U.S., Congress, House, Special Committee on Un-American Activities, 
Investigation of Nazi Propaganda Activites and Investigation of Certain Other 
Propaganga Activities, 73d Cong., 2d Sess., Dec. 29, 1934. Hearings no. 73- 
D.C.-6, Part 1. Reported issued Feb. 15, 1935 HUAC, House Report no. 153 74 
Congress, George Seldes; 7000 Americans (N.Y: Boni & Gaer, 1947), p. 290-292. 

20 Antony C. Sutton, Wall Street and FDR (New Rochelle, N.Y: Arlington 
House Publishers, 1975), p. 143-160. 

21 Archer, op. cit., Note 16, p. ix. 

22 "Plot Without Plotters," Time, XXIV (December 3, 1934), p. 13-15. 



278 Treason The New World order 



23 John Spivak, A Man In His Time (N.Y: Horizon Press, 1967), 
p. 298. 

24 Archer, op. cit., Note 16, p. 190. 

25 Archer, op. cit., Note 16, p. ix. 

26 U.S. Congress, Senate, Special Committee Investigating the Munitions 
Industry, Hearings, 73 Congress, 2d sess. (Washington, D.C: Government 
Printing Office, 1934-37); George Seldes, Iron Blood and Profits (N.Y: Harper & 
Brothers, 1934). 

27 Wayne S. Cole, Roosevelt and the Isolationists 1932-45 (Lincoln, Nebraska: 
U. of Nebraska Press, 1983), p. 141-162. 

28 John E. Wiltz, In Search of Peace (Baton Rouge, La: Louisiana State 
University Press, 1963), p. 197-202. 

29 Raymond G. Swing, "Morgan's Nerves Begin to Jump," The Nation, May 1, 
1935, p. 504. 

30 Harry Williams, Kuey Long (N.Y: Alfred A. Knopf, 1969). 

31 John T. Flynn, The Roosevelt Myth (N.Y: The Devin-Adair Company, 1948), 
p. 66. 

32 Carleton Beats, The Story of Huey P. Long (Westport, Ct: Greenwood Press, 
1935), p. 404-407. 

33 Allan A. Michie and Frank Ryhlick, Dixie Demagogues (N.Y: Vanguard Press, 
1939), p. 116. 

34 Higham, op. cit., Note 17, p. 167-8; U.S., Congress, Congressional Record, 
Appendix, August 20, 1942, p. A3134. 

35 Charles Higham, American Swastika (Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday & Co., 
Inc., 1985). 

36 John Roy Carlson, Under Cover (N.Y: E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 1943), p. 
460. 

37 Michele F. Stenehjem, An American First (New Rochelle, N.Y: Arlington 
House Publishers, 1976), p. 29-30. 

38 Bill Kauffman, America First (Amherst, N.Y: Prometheus Books, 1995), p. 
11, 15-21, 95-96. 

39 George Seldes, Facts and Fascism (N.Y: In fact, Inc. 1943), p. 68, 254. 

40 Ibid., p. 153-4, 254, 262-4. 

41 Ibid., p. 68, 262. 

42 Joseph Borkin, The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben (N.Y: Macmillan 
Publishing Co., Inc., 1978), p. 76-80. 

43 R. Buckminster Fuller, Critical Path (N.Y: St Martin's Press, 1981), p. 104. 

44 Seldes, op. cit., Note 39, p. 75. 

45 Seldes, op. cit., Note 19, p. 153, 162; Infact February 1 and 8, 1942; Seldes, 
op. cit., Note 39, p. 75; U.S., Congress, Munitions Hearings Part 12. 

46 James Stewart Martin, All Honorable Men (Boston: Little, Brown and 
Company, 1950), p. 19-23. 

47 John Loftus and Mark Aarons, The Secret War Against the Jews (N.Y: St. 
Martin's Press, 1994), p. 55-105. 

48 David Ignatius, "Britain's War In America," Washington Post, September 17, 
1989, p. CI, C2. 

49 Martin, op. cit.. Note 46, p. 67-68. 



Notes 279 



50 Higham, op. cit., Note 17, p. xxiv-xxv, 188-191; "Uncle Sam and the 
Swastika," Archives on Audio, radio telecast, May 23, 1980, August 12, 1990, 
May 24, 1992, May 30, 1993. Mil. Produced by Dave Emory. 

51 Sutton, op. cit., Note 13, p. 128-132, 123, 83, 79, 68. 

52 Martin, op. cit., Note 46, p. 79; Sutton, op. cit., Note 13, p. 149-161. 

53 Martin, op. cit., Note 46, p. 277. 

54 Martin, op. cit., Note 46, p. 264-6, 279-280, 288-291, 295-7. 

55 Tom Bower, The Paperclip Conspiracy: The Hunt for the Nazi Scientists 
(Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1987). 

56 Christopher Simpson, Blowback (N.Y: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1988). 

57 Carl Oglesby, "Reinhard Gehlen: The Secret Treaty of Fort Hunt," Covert 
Action, Number 35 (Fall, 1990), 8-16. 

58 Martin Lee, "Hitler's Last Laugh," Propaganda Review, Number 4 (Spring, 
1989), 17-21. 

59 Russ Bellant, Old Nazis, the New Right and the Republican Party (Boston: 
South End Press, 1989); Russ Bellant, "Old Nazis and the New Right: The 
Republican Party and Fascists," Covert Action, Number 33 (Winter, 1990), 27- 
31. 

60 Peter Braestrup, "GOP's 'Open Door:' Who's Coming In?" Washington Post, 
November 21, 1971, p. Al. 

61 Lee, op. cit., Note 58, p. 21. 

Chapter VIII Rise of the Corporate State 

1 Alex Carey, Taking the Risk Out of Democracy (Sydney, Australia: U. of New 
South Wales Press, 1995), p. 18. 

2 Jonathan Rowe, "Reinventing the Corporation," The Washington Monthly, 
XXVIII (April, 1996), 16-23; Richard L. Grossman and Frank T. Adams, Taking 
Care of Business: Citizenship and the Charier of Incorporation (Cambridge, Ma: 
Charter, Ink, 1993). 

3 William Leach, Land of Desire (N.Y: Pantheon Books, 1993), p. 3. 

4 Stuart Ewen, Captains of Consciousness (N.Y: McGraw-Hill, 1976). 

5 Samuel Strauss, "The Future," The Villager, April 28, 1923, p. 119. 

6 Leach, op. cit., Note 3, p. xiii. 

7 Walter Weyl, The New Democracy (N.Y: The Macmillan Company, 1912), p. 
331. 

8 Walter Karp, Buried Alive (N.Y: Henry Holt & Co., 1988), p. 164. 

9 Samuel Strauss, "Things Are in the Saddle," The Atlantic Monthly, 134 
(November, 1924), 577-588. 

10 Samuel Strauss, "Rich Men and Key Men," The Atlantic Monthly, CXL 
(December, 1927), 721-729. 

11 G.K. Chesterton, "What of the Republic," in The Collected Works of G.K. 
Chesterton, ed. by Robert Royal (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986), p. 588. 

12 Ibid., p. 590. 

13 Lewis H. Lapham, Money and Class In America (N.Y: Weidenfeld & 
Nicolson, 1988), p. 215. 

14 Lewis H. Lapham, The Wishfor Kings (N.Y: Grove Press, 1993), p. 36. 

15 William H. Roberts and Edwin P. Rome, Corporate and Commercial Speech: 
First Amendment Protection of Expression in Business (Westport: Quorum, 

1985). 



280 Treason The New World order 



16 Charles A. Reich, Opposing the System (N.Y: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1995, 

p. 41. 

17Jaye Scholl, "Giving Business the Business," Barron's, March 25, 1991, p. 18- 

19. People can now access the ethical performance of 20,000 corporations with the 

database provided by The Ethical Consumer Research Association 16 Nicholas St., 

5th floor, Manchester Ml 4EJ, U.K. This group also publishes the Ethical 

Consumer magazine. 

18 Russell Mokhiber, "Underworld U.S.A.," In These Times, April 1, 1996, p. 
14-16. 

19 Richard Behar and Michael Kramer, "Something Smells Fowl," Time, October 
17, 1994, p. 42-44. 

20 Kurt Eichenwald, "Brokerage Firm Admits Crimes in Energy Deals," New 
York Times, October 28, 1994, p. Al, C13. 

21 Carla Atkinson, "The New Civil War," Public Citizen, XI (January/February, 
1991), 13-15. 

22 Bruce Alpert, "Targeting 'Corporate Welfare,'" San Francisco Examiner, 
December 11, 1994, p. B3. 

23 James Bovard, "Plowing Deeper," Barrons, April 15, 1996, p. 58. 

24 Linda Grant and Robert F. Black, "Getting Business Off the Dole," U.S. News 
& World Report, April 10, 1995, p. 38; Howard Gleckman, "Welfare Cuts: Now, 
It's Corporate America's Turn," Business Week, April 10, 1995, p. 37. 

25 Karen Tumulty, "Why Subsidies Survive," Time, March 25, 1996, p. 46-47. 

26 Ralph Nader, "Easy Money," In These Times February 19, 1996, p. 14-17; 
Ruth Simon, "You're Losing Your Consumer Rights," Money, XXV (March, 
1996), 100-111. 

27 Richard J. Barnet, "Stateless Corporations: Lords of the Global Economy," The 
Nation, December 19, 1994, p. 754-757. 

28 Peter Downs, "A Return to Corporate Serfdom," Z Magazine, V (March, 
1992), 96-99. 

29 Eve Pell, "Libel As A Political Weapon," The Nation, June 6, 1981, p. 681, 
698-700. 

30 Eric F. Coppolino, "Dioxin Critic Sued," Lies Of Our Times, V (May, 1994), 
23-24. 

31 "Libel and Then Some," Muckracker, (October, 1994), 3. 

32 John Sterling, "SLAPP-Happy Corporations Get SLAPPed Back," Earth Island 
Journal, IX (Spring, 1994), 20. 

33 James A. Smith, 77K? Idea Brokers (N.Y: Macmillan, Inc., 1991). 

34 David S. Broder and Michael Wessikopf, "Finding New Friends on the Hill," 
The Washington Post National Weekly, XI October 3-9, 1994, p. 11. 

35 Herbert Schiller, Culture, Inc The Corporate Takeover of Public Expression 
(N.Y: Oxford Uiversity Press, 1989), p. 106. 

36 Michael Parenti, Land of Idols (N.Y: St. Martin's Press, 1994), p. 94-95. 

37 Hans Haacke, "Museums, Managers of Consciousness," in Hans Haacke 
Unfinished Business, ed. by Brian Wallis (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986), p. 71. 

38 David Margolick, "Albany High Court Lets Malls Restrict Leafleting," New 
York Times, December 20, 1985, p. Al, Bll. 

39 Scott G. Bullock, "The Mall's in Their Court," Reason, XXVII 
(August/September, 1995), 46-48. 

40 "Selling to School Kids," Consumer Reports, 60 (May, 1995), 327-329. 



Notes 281 



41 Richard Foreman, Leasing the Ivory Tower: The Corporate Takeover of 
Academia (Boston: South End Press, 1995), p. 145; Elizabeth Fones-Wolf, 
Selling Free Enterprise: The Business Assault on Labor and Liberalism (Chicago: 
University of Illinois Press, 1994), p. 189-217. 

42 Ron Nixon, "Truth to the Highest Bidder: Science for Sale," Covert Action, 
Number 52 (Spring, 1995), 48-53. 

43 Joel Bleifuss, "With Science on Their Side," In These Times, October 30, 
1995, p. 12-14. 

44 Fones-Wolf, op. cit., Note 41. 

45 Robert Pear, "Doctors Say H.M.O.'s Limit What They Can Tell Patients," 
New York Times, December 21, 1995, p. Al; Susan Brink, "How Your HMO 
Could Hurt You," U.S. News & World Report, January 15, 1996, p. 62-64. 

46 Schiller op. cit., Note 35, p. 67, 111, 157. 

47 Ibid., p. 3, 162, 163. 

48 Grant McConnell, Private Power and American Democracy (N.Y: Alfred A. 
Knopf, 1966), p. 361-362. 

49 Gerry Spence, From Freedom to Slavery (N.Y: St. Martin's Press, 1993), p. 
xiii-xiv, 7. 

50 Arthur S. Miller, The Modern Corporate State (Westport, Ct: Greenwood 
Press, 1976), p. 115, 196,216-217. 

51 Richard Barber, The American Corporation: Its Power, Its Money, Its Politics 
(N.Y: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1970), p. 188-189. 

52 Matt Murray, "Amid Record Profits, Companies Continue to Lay Off 
Employees," Wall Street Journal, May 4, 1995, p. Al, A5. 

53 Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., "In Defense of Government," Wall Street Journal, June 
7, 1995, p. A14. 

54 Joel Bleifuss, "The New Abolitionists," In These Times, April 1, 1996, p. 12- 
13. Organizations formed to curtail corporate power include: The Program on 

Corporations, Law and Democracy P.O. Box 806 Cambridge, Ma. 02140, 
International Forum on Globalization P.O. Box 12218 S.F., Ca. 94112, and 
Share the Wealth 37 Temple PI Boston, Ma. 02111. 

55 C. Wright Mills, Power Elite (N.Y: Oxford U. Press, 1956). 

Chapter IX Rise of the Transnational Corporations 

1 Jeremy Brecher and Tim Costello, "The Lilliput Strategy: Taking on the 
Multinationals," The Nation, December 19, 1994, p. 757-760; Edward S. Herman, 
"The End of Democracy?" Z Magazine, VI (September, 1993), 57-62; Edward S. 
Herman, "Economists Versus Democracy," ZMagazine, VI (Dec, 1993), 54-58. 

2 Bruce Rich, "Fifty Years of World Bank Outrages," Earth Island Journal, IX 
(Winter 1993-1994), 34-35; Jude Wanniski, "An IFI Question: Are Multilateral 
the Solution. ..Or Part of the Problem?" Wall Street Journal, October 12, 1995, p. 
A22; Patricia Adams, "A Troubling Deposit at World Bank," Wall Street Journal, 
November 29, 1995, p. A14. 

3 Richard J. Barnet, "Stateless Corporations: Lords of the Global Economy," The 
Nation, December 19, 1994, p. 754-757; Richard J. Barnet, Global Dreams: 
Imperial Corporations and the New World Order (N.Y: Simon & Schuster, 1994). 

4 Keith B. Rickburg, "A Line of 'Big Men' Has Thrown Democracy For A Loss," 
The Washington Post National Weekly, XII January 9-15, 1995, p. 18. 

5 Charles Lane, "Rabble Rousing," The New Republic, June 12, 1995, p. 15-16. 



282 Treason The New World order 



6 William I. Robinson, "Low Intensity Democracy: The New Face of Global 
Domination," Covert Action, Number 50 (Fall, 1994), 40-47. 

7 Michel Crozier, Samuel P. Huntington, and Joji Watanuki, The Crisis of 
Democracy: Report on the Governability of Democracies to the Trilateral 
Commission (N.Y: New York University Press, 1975). 

8 Stephen Gill, American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission (Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press, 1990). 

9 Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 2nd edition (N.Y: 
Harper & Row, 1947). 

10 Noam Chomsky, "Rollback IV: Towards a Utopia of the Masters," Z 
Magazine, VIII (May, 1995), 18-24. 

11 "Soft-soaping India," New Statesman & Society, January 13, 1995, p. 24-25. 

12 Walker F. Todd, "Mexican Handout: Bailing Out the Creditor Class," The 
Nation, February 13, 1995, p. 193-194. 

13 George J. Church, "Mexico's Troubles Are Our Troubles," Time, March 6, 
1995, p. 34-40. 

14 Martin Espinoza, "Mexico's Next Revolution," San Francisco Bay Guardian, 
February 22, 1995, p. 22-23, 25; Ken Silverstein and Alexander Cockburn, "Who 
Broke Mexico: The Killers and the Killing," The Nation, March 6, 1995, p. 306- 
308, 310. 

15 David Asman, "Don't Cry For Argentina," Wall Street Journal, May 4, 1995, 
p. A14. 

16 Walker F. Todd, "Guess Whose Banks We're Planning to Bail Out Next," 
Sacramento Bee, December 31, 1995, Forum p. 1,6. 

17 "NAFTA's Progress Next Stop South," The Economist, February 25, 1995, p. 
29-30. 

18 Henry Kissinger, "For U.S. Leadership, a Moment Missed," Washington Post, 
May 12, 1995, p. A26. 

19 "In Need of Fastening," The Economist, May 27, 1995, p. 15-16. 

20 Steven Greenhouse, "Christopher Backs Free Trade Willi Europe," New York 
Times, June 3, 1995, p. A5. 

21 Richard N. Cooper, "A Monetary System For the Future," Foreign Affairs, 63 
(Fall, 1984), 166-184. 

22 "A Question of Motive," The Economist, September 30, 1995, p. 16; Rob 
Norton, "There Go Those Eurocrats Again," Fortune, September 18, 1995, p. 51. 

23 James Goldsmith, The Trap (N.Y: Carroll and Graf Publishers, Inc., 1994). 

24 U.S., Congress, Senate, Committee On Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation, GATT Treaty, Hearings, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. (Washington, D.C: 
Government Printing Office, 1994), p. 495, 498, 503. 

25 U.S., Congress, House, Committee on Ways and Means, GATT Treaty, 103d 
Cong., 2nd Sess. June 10, 1994, (Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 
1994), p. 131. 

26 James Goldsmith, "The GATT Trap," Earth Island Journal, X (Winter, 1995), 
32-34. 

27 George J. Church, "Are We Better Off?" Time, January 29, 1996, p. 36-40. 

28 Aaron Bernstein, "Is America Becoming More of A Class Society?" Business 
Week, February 26, 1996, p. 86-91. 

29 "Cheap Labor," Mother Jones, XXI (January/February, 1996), 13; John 
Greenwald, "Cutting Off the Brains," Time, February 5, 1996, p. 46; Michael S. 



Notes 283 



Teitelbaum, "Too Many Engineers, Too Few Jobs," New York Times, March 19, 
1996, p. A17. 

30 Christopher Lasch, "The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy," 
Harpers, 289 (November, 1994), 47. 

31 Robert B. Reich, "Who Is Us?" Harvard Business Review, 90 
(January/February, 1990), 59. 

32 William Greider, "The Global Marketplace: Closet Dictator," In The Case 
Against Free Trade GATT, NAFTA, and the Globalization of Corporate Power, 
ed. Ralph Nader et al (Berkeley: North Atlantic Books, 1993), p. 209. 

33 Lasch, op. cit., Note 30, p. 49. 

34 Richard G. Gardner, "The Hard Road to World Order Foreign Affairs", 52 (April, 
1974), 558-560. 

35 Jeremy Brecher, "After NAFTA: Global Village or Global Pillage?" The 
Nation, December 6, 1993, p. 685-688; Jeremy Brecher and John B. Childs, 
Global Visions: Beyond the New World Order (Boston: South End Press, 1993). 

36 George Seldes, Facts and Fascism (N.Y: In fact, Inc., 1943), p. 49-50; 
"Japanese Fascism: Its Structure and Significance For Contemporary Americans," 
Archives on Audio, radio telecast, October 2, 1988. M26. Produced by Dave 
Emory. 

37 Laxmi Nakarmi, "The Kiwis Are Open for Business," Business Week, 
September 25, 1995, p. 117-118; Franklin Winchester, "New Zealand From 
Welfare State to Utopia?" Perceptions, II (September/October, 1995), 10-12. 

Chapter X Rise of the National Security State: The Cold War and 
Democracy 

I John W. Baer, "The Strange Origin of the Pledge of Allegiance," Propaganda 
Review, Number 5 (Summer, 1989), 36-37. 

2 Walter Karp, Buried Alive (N.Y: Franklin Square Press, 1992), p. 13-26. 

3 Bruce D. Porter, War and the Rise of the State (N.Y: Macmillan, 1994), p. 292- 
3. 

4 James Madison, "Political Observations," in Letter and Other Writings of James 
Madison, Vol. IV (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott and Co., 1865), p. 491-2. 

5 Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy In America, Vol 2 (N.Y: Vintage, 1990), p. 
269. 

6 Porter, op. cit., Note 3, p. xv. 

7 Gore Vidal, The Decline and Fall of the American Empire (Berkeley: Odonian 
Press, 1992), p. 30. 

8 R. Buckminster Fuller, Critical Path (N.Y: St Martin's Press, 1981), p. 116. 

9 William A. Williams, "The Cold-War Revisionists," The Nation, November 13, 
1967, p. 492-495. 

10 H.W. Brands, The Devil We Knew: Americans and the Cold War (N.Y: Oxford 
University Press, 1993), p. vi. 

II Barton J. Bernstein, "American Foreign Policy and the Origins of the Cold 
War," in Politics and Policies of the Truman Administration, ed. by Barton J. 
Bernstein (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1970), p. 16-17. 

12 "Aviation RFC," Business Week, January 31, 1948, p. 28, 30, 32. 

13 "From Cold War to Cold Peace," Business Week, February 12, 1949, p. 19- 
20. 



284 Treason The New World order 



14 Frank Kofsky, Harry S. Truman and the War Scare of 1948 (N.Y: St. Martin's 
Press, 1993), p. 308. 

15 Carl Bernstein, Loyalties: A Son's Memoir (N.Y: Simon & Schuster, 1989), 
p. 197-198. 

16 Kofsky, op. cit„ Note 14, p. 246. 

17 Harold B. Hinton, "Eisenhower Scoffs at Fears of a War Started By Russia," 
New York Times, February, 6 1948, p. 1, 12. 

18 "Crisis," Wall Street Journal, April 2, 1948, p. 4. 

19 Brands, op. cit., Note 10, p. 23-24. 

20 Harold D. Lasswell, National Security and Individual Freedom (N.Y: McGraw- 
Hill Book Co., Inc., 1950), p. 23, 47. 

21 Karp, op. cit., Note 2, p. 111. 

22 Michael Parenti, Inventing Reality (N.Y: St. Martin's Press, 1986), p. 126. 

23 Stewart Udall, The Myths of August (N.Y: Pantheon, 1994), p. xi-xii, 7, 344, 
346, 354, 357. 

24 Lewis Lapham, Wish for Kings (N.Y: Grove Press, 1993), p. 157, 177. 

25 Bill Moyers, The Secret Government: The Constitution In Crisis (Washington, 
D.C: Seven Locks Press, 1988), p. 16, 27, 54, 78, 89, 100, 101, 117. 

26 Vidal, op. cit., Note 7, p. 50, 63. 

27 William Greider, Who Will Tell the People (N.Y: Simon & Schuster, 1992), 
p. 374-5. 

28 Ibid., p. 360. 

29 David Wise, The Politics of Lying (N.Y: Random House, 1973), p. 343. 

30 Ibid., p. 64. 

31 Ibid., p. 342, 344, 345. 

32 Peter Montgomery and Peter Overby, "The Fight to Know," Common Cause 
Magazine, (July/August, 1991), 17-21. 

33 Lyle Denniston "Court Nibbles Away at FOIA," Washington Journalism 
Review, XIV (March, 1992), 64. 

34 Robert P. Deyling, "Judicial Deference and De Novo Review in Litigation 
Over National Security Information Under the Freedom of Information Act," 
Villanova Law Review, 37 (1992), 67-112. 

35 Janine Jackson, "Top Secret: What the Government Isn't Telling You," Extra, 
VI (November/December, 1993), 14-16, 19. 

36 EO 12937 Federal Register Nov. 15, 1994 p. 59097. 

37 This publication can be ordered from: Federation of American Scientists 307 
Mass. Ave., N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002. 

38 Felix Morley, Freedom and Federalism (Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1981), p. 
xx. 

39 George Edwards, III and Earl W. Wallace, eds., National Security and the U.S. 
Constitution (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1988), p. 68, 324. 

40 Patrick Kennon, The Twilight of Democracy (N.Y: Doubleday and Co., 1995), 
p. 125. 

41 Ann Markusen and Joel Yudken, Dismantling the Cold War Economy (N.Y: 
Harper Collins Publications, Inc., 1992). 

42 William Greider, "The Country that Stayed Out in the Cold," Rolling Stone, 
Number 622 January 23, 1992, p. 19-20. 

43 Robert Pollin, "Dismantling Defense: Use Conversion to Create Jobs," The 
Nation, July 12, 1993, p. 66-68. 



Notes 285 



44 David Moberg, "Conversion Inexperience," In These Times, December 26, 
1994, p. 14-19. 

45 Archibald MacLeish, "The Conquest of America," The Atlantic Monthly, 184 
(August, 1949), 17-22. 

46 Brands, op. cit., Note 10, p. 224-228. 

Chapter XI The CIA and the Intelligence Community 

1 Tim Weiner, "Senate Committee Receives Apology From Spy Agency," New 
York Times, August 11, 1994, p. Al, C19. 

2 Tim Weiner, Blank Check The Pentagons Black Budget (N.Y: Warner Books, 
1990), p. 7. 

3 Walter Pincus, "Spy Agency Hoards Secret $1 Billion," Washington Post, 
September 24, 1995, p. Al, A22; Tim Weiner, "A Secret Agency's Secret Budgets 
Yield 'Lost' Billions, Officials Say," New York Times, January 30, 1996, p. Al. 

4 Federalist 58, Final Report p. 412. 

5 G. Hunt, ed., Letter to W.T. Barry, August 4, 1822, The Writings of James 
Madison, Vol. 9 (N.Y: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1910), p. 103. 

6 Weiner, op. cit., Note 2, p. 24, 111. 

7 Stewart L. Udall, The Myths of August (N.Y: Pantheon, 1994), p. 7. 

8 Merle Miller, Plain Speaking: An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman (N.Y: 
Berkeley Publishing, 1974), p. 392. 

9 Steven Emerson, Secret Warriors (N.Y: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1988). 

10 Bill Moyers, The Secret Government: The Constitution In Crisis (Washington, 
D.C: Seven Locks Press, 1988), p. 92. 

11 Verne Lyon, "Domestic Surveillance: The History of Operation CHAOS," 
Covert Action, Number 34 (Summer, 1990), 59-62. 

12 "The Select Committee's Investigative Record" The Village Voice, February 
15, 1976, p. 72-91. 

13 Tim Weiner, "The Pentagon's Secret Stash," Mother Jones, XVII 
(March/April, 1992), 22-28. 

14 John Stockwell, The Praetorian Guard (Boston: South End Press, 1991), p. 
101. 

15 Peter Cassidy, "The Banker Who Said No to the CIA," The Progressive, 56 
(June, 1992), 24-25. 

16 James R. Adams and Douglas Frantz, A Full Service. Bank (N.Y: Simon & 
Schuster, Inc., 1992), p. 326-7. 

17 "The BCCI-CIA Connection: Just How Far Did It Go?" Newsweek, December 
7, 1992, p. 49. 

18 Tom Post, Daniel Pedersen, and Sieve Le Vine, "The CIA and BCCI," 
Newsweek, August 12, 1991, p. 16-19, 21; Jack Calhoun, "BCCI: The Bank of 
the CIA," Covert Action, Number 44 (Spring, 1993), 40-45. 

19 Ralph Nader, "How Clinion Can Build Democracy," The Nation, November 
30, 1992, p. 649, 652-3. 

20 Pete Brewton, The Mafia, CIA and George Bush (N.Y: Shapolsky Publishers, 
Inc., 1992), p. 384, 385. 

21 Ibid., p. 343-357. 

22 Steve Weinberg, "The Mob, the CIA and the S&L Scandal," Columbia 
Journalism Review, XXIX (November/December, 1990), 28-35; Rebecca Sims, 



286 Treason The New World order 



"Operatives and S&Ls: The CIA and Financial Institutions," Covert Action, 
Number 35 (Fall, 1990), 43-48. 

23 David Corn, "The Company They Keep," The Washington Monthly, XXVI 
(July/August, 1994), 34-38. 

24 David Corn, Blond Ghost: Ted Shackley and the CIAs Crusaders (N.Y: Simon 
& Schuster, 1994). 

25 Marcus Raskin, "Let's Terminate the C.I. A.," The Nation, June 8, 1992, p. 
776-7. 

26 Stockwell, op. cit., Note 14, p. 51-2. 

27 Frank Smyth, "My Enemy's Friends," The New Republic, June 5, 1995, p. 
18. 

28 James Risen, "Congressman Under Fire for CIA Disclosures," Los Angeles 
Times, April 8, 1995, p. Al, 14. 

29 Tim Weiner, "Spy Suspect Relied Deceptively On Lie Test in 1991, F.B.I. 
Says," New York Times, March 8, 1994, p. 1, 18. 

30 Ronald J. Ostrow and Robert L Jackson, "CIA Overlooked Red Flag From 
Ameses' Bank," Los Angeles Times, March 12, 1994, p. Al, 16. 

31 David Johnston, "Prosecutors Say Official At C.I. A. Spied For Russia," New 
York Times, February 23, 1994, p. Al. 

32 Mark Almond, "The KGB and America's War on Drugs," Wall Street Journal, 
March 10, 1994, p. A18. 

33 Bill Gertz, "CIA: IMF Aid to Moscow Paid Ames," The Washington Times 
National Weekly, December 4-10, 1995, p. 17. 

34 "The C.I.A.'s False Intelligence," New York Times, November 29, 1995, p. 
A14. 

35 Jack Anderson and Michael Binstein, "Testifying to the CIA's Arrogance," 
Washington Post, January 11, 1996, p. 10. 

36 George McGovern, "We Need A Constitutional Presidency," Parade Magazine, 
August 9, 1987. 

37 Jeffrey Denny, "See No Evil," Common Cause Magazine, XVII (July/August, 
1991), 23-27, 40. 

38 Rodney Stich, Defrauding America (Alamo, Ca: Diablo Western Press, Inc., 
1993), p. 312. 

39 Jack Colhoun, "Bush Administration Uses CIA To Stonewall Iraqgate 
Investigation," Covert Action, Number 42 (Fall, 1992), 40-41. 

40 David Andelman, "The CIA's Trade Secret," Worth, II (December/January, 
1994), 19. 

41 Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen, 50 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time 
(N.Y: A Citadel Press Book, 1995), p. 157-164. 

42 Stich, op. cit., Note 38, p. 286-287, 431, 517. 

43 Angelo Codevilla, "Get Smart-Eliminate the CIA." Wall Street Journal, 
January 18, 1995, p. A16. 

44 David Ignatius, "Reinvent the CIA," Washington Monthly, XXVI (April, 
1994), 38; Rob Norton, "The CIA's Mission Improbable," Fortune, 132 (October 
2, 1995), 55. 

45 Raskin, op. cit., Note 25, p. 776-784. 

46 R. Buckminster Fuller, Critical Path (N.Y: St. Martin's Press, 1981), p. 116. 



Notes 287 



47 Robert Dreyfuss, "Spying For Dollars," In These Times, March 20, 1995, p. 
24-26; Anthony L. Kimery, "The CIA: Banking On Intelligence," Covert Action, 
Number 46 (Fall, 1993), 55-59. 

48 Russ W. Baker, "CIA Out of Control," Village Voice, September 10, 1991, p. 

35-41. 

Chapter XII State and Federal Police 

1 Athan Theoharis, From the Secret Files of J. Edgar Hoover (Chicago: Ivan R. 
Dee, 1991), p. 2. 

2 Mary King, Freedom Song (N.Y: William Morrow and Co., Inc., 1987), p. 
228; Howard Zinn, "Federal Bureau of Intimidation," Covert Action, Number 47 
(Winter 1993-1994), 27-31. 

3 Louis Wolf, "Bag of Dirty Tricks," Covert Action, Number 47 (Winter 1993- 
1994), 54. 

4 Ken Lawrence, "Sources and Methods: Mail Surveillance," Covert Action, 
Number 12 (April, 1981), 44-45, 48. 

5 Zinn, op. cit., Note 2, p. 30; Ford Rowan, Techno Spies (N.Y: G. P. Putnam's 
Sons, 1978), p. 37. 

6 Frank J. Donner, The Age of Surveillance (N.Y: Alfred A. Knopf, 1980), p. 
162-168. 

7 Loch K. Johnson, America's Secret Power (N.Y: Oxford U. Press, 1989), p. 5. 

8 Bertram Gross, Friendly Fascism (Boston: South End Press, 1980), p. 306. 

9 Theoharis, op. cit., Note 1, p. 357. 

10 Manning Marable, Pace, Reform and Rebellion: The Second Reconstruction in 
Black America, 1945-1982 (Jackson: U. of Mississippi Press, 1984), p. 125. 

1 1 Rex Weyler, Blood of the Land: The Government and Corporate War Against 
the American Indian Movement (N.Y: Everest House, 1982); Ward Churchill, 
"The Government's Propaganda War Against the American Indian Movement," 
Extra, V (October/November, 1992), 22-24. 

12 Wolf, op. cit., Note 3, 55-56; William Steif, "Puerto Rico's Watergate," The 
Progressive, 56 (October, 1992), 28-31. 

13 Mike Rothmiller, L.A. Secret Police: Inside the LAPD Elite Spy Network 
(N.Y: Pocket Books, 1992). 

14 Jack Cheevers, "FBI Compiled Thick Dossier on Phil Burton," The Tribune, 
September 12, 1988, p. Al, A2. 

15 Christopher Hitchens, "Minority Report," The Nation, April 25, 1987, p. 531. 

16 John Stockwell, The Praetorian Guard (Boston: South End Press, 1991), p. 
105-6. 

17 Ross Gelbspan, Break-ins Death Threats and the FBI (Boston: South End 
Press, 1991); Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall, Agents of Repression: the 
FBI's Secret War Against the Black Panier Parly and the American Indian 
Movement (Boston: South End Press, 1988). 

18 "FDA's Strange Raid," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 11, 1992. 

19 David Helvarg, The War Against the Greens (San Francisco, Ca: Sierra Club, 
1994), p. 396. 

20 Ibid., p. 400,402. 

21 Judi Bari, "Fighting An FBI Frame-Up," Earth Island Journal, IX (Summer, 
1994), 40-41. 



288 Treason The New World order 



22 Joel Bleifuss, "Dirty Tricks Are Here Again," In These Times, October 17, 
1994, p. 12-14. 

23 David Z. Nevin, "It Could Happen to Anyone," Washington Post, July 18, 
1993, p. C7. 

24 David Johnston, "Idaho Siege Report Says F.B.I. Agents Violated Procedure," 
New York Times, December 13, 1994, p. Al, All. 

25 David Johnston, "F.B.I. Leader at 1992 Standoff in Idaho Says Review 
Shielded Top Officials," New York Times, May 10, 1995, p. A15. 

26 R. W. Bradford, "Still Smoldering," Liberty, VIII (July, 1995), 22-24. 

27 "Religious Views of Some Extremists May Fuel More Violence," Los Angeles 
Times, April 29, 1995, p. B4, B5. 

28 James Bovard, "The New J. Edgar Hoover," American Spectator, XXVIII 
(August, 1995), 28-35. 

29 "They Swooped," The Economist, August 19, 1995, p. 27. 

30 David A. Burnham, "Bureaucratus Gigantus vs. Tyrannosaurus Rex," 
AntiShyster, V (Spring, 1995), 14-15. 

31 Lola Sherman and Jim Okerblom, "Herb Firm Polluting is Alleged," The San 
Diego Untion Tribune, August 25, 1995, p. Bl, B5. 

32 Jack Lamb, "American Treason Busters," Aid & Abet Police Newsletter, II 
(July, 1994), 6. 

33 Valerie Richardson, "No Nonsense Idaho Sheriff Tells Feds to Steer Clear," 
Washington Times National Weekly, September 4-10, 1995, p. Al, A15. 

34 Michael Hedges, "ATF Hunts Down Gun, Not Criminals," The Washington 
Times National Weekly, April 24-30, 1995, p. 1, 15. 

35 John D. Lewis, Jr., "American Gestapo," Reason, XI (April, 1980), 24-28, 44. 

36 Troy Underhill and David Coker, "The Feds Raid on NAFC," Media Bypass, II 
(December, 1994), 40-45. 

37 Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball, "One Fed's War on the FBI," Newsweek, 
September 25, 1995, p. 45. 

38 Rodney Stich, Defrauding America (Alamo, Ca: Diable Western Press, Inc., 
1993), p. 411-4. 

39 "'Framed' by the FBI," AntiShyster, V (Fall, 1995), 48-55. 

40 Gordon Witkin, "Enlisting the Feds in the War on Gangs," U.S. New & World 
Report, March 6, 1995, p. 38-39. 

41 Steven B. Rich, "The National Guard, Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug 
Activities, and Posse Comitatus: The Meaning and Implications of 'In Federal 
Service,'" The Army Lawyer, (June, 1994), 35-43. 

42 Peter Cassidy, "Guess Who's the Enemy," The Progressive, 60 (January, 
1996), 22-24. 

43 Bill Swindell, "Militia Coordinator On Federal Payroll," Tulsa World, April 7, 
1996, p. A15; Bill Swindell, "Militia Figure Won't Take Cash From FBI," Tulsa 
World, April 17, 1996, p. A9. 

44 James Ridgeway, "The Long Arm of the Law," Village Voice, May 21, 1996, 
p. 32. 

45 Mike Zielinski, "Armed and Dangerous: Private Police on the March," Covert 
Action, Number 54 (Fall, 1995), 44-50. 

46 Richard Behar, "Stalked by Allstate," Fortune, October 2, 1995, p. 128, 130- 
132, 134, 136, 138, 140, 142. 



Notes 289 



47 John Connolly, "Inside the Shadow CIA," Spy, VI (September, 1992), 46-54; 
Donner, op. cit., Note 6, p. 414-451. 

48 David B. Kopel, "Knock, Knock," National Review, March 20, 1995, p. 54, 
56-58. 

49 David Wise, The American Police State (N.Y: Random House, 1976), p. 398. 

Chapter XIII Militias in American History 

1 Stephen P. Hallbrook, "The Right to Bear Arms in the First State Bills of 
Rights: Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Vermont, and Massachusetts," Vermont 
Law Review, X (Fall, 1985), 314. 

2 William S. Fields and David T. Hardy, "The Militia and the Constitution: A 
Legal History," Military Law Review, 136 (Spring, 1992); James B. Whisker, 
"The Citizen-Soldier Under Federal and State Law," West Virginia Law Review, 
94, (Summer, 1992). 

3 Pauline Maier, From Resistance to Revolution (N.Y: Alfred A. Knopf, 1974). 

4 Hallbrook, op cit., Note 1,